Reverend  and  Dear  Father: 

An  apology  is  never  needed  for  a heart-to-heart  talk  between 

. 

ijie  Directors  of  the  Apostleship  of  Prayer;  but  at  the  present 
juncture  the  omission  of  such  a more  intimate  conversation 
would  amount  to  a positive  fault.  It  is  not  merely  that  we 
are  approaching  the  time  best  suited  for  the  choice  of  Pro- 
moters and  the  renewal  of  fervor  in  the  body  of  the  members ; 
nor  do  I refer  merely  to  the  nearness  of  the  joyful  season  when 
the  human  heart  is  wont  to  show  itself  to  its  best  advantage; 
but  I write  under  the  influence  of  events  that  bear  an  im- 
portant relation  to  the  welfare  of  the  whole  Apostleship  of 
Prayer,  and  in  particular  of  the  portion  which  is  found  within 
the  territory  of  the  United  States.  On  April  18  died  the 
Director-General  of  the  Apostleship  of  Prayer,  Father  Luis 
Martin,  the  Father-General  of  the  Society  of  Jesus;  he  has 
been  succeeded  by  Father  Francis  Wernz,  whose  election  to 
the  generalship  of  the  Society  of  Jesus  occurred  on  the  Feast 
of  the  Nativity  of  our  Blessed  Lady,  September  8.  Besides, 
the  Central  Director  of  the  Apostleship  existing  in  the  boun- 
daries of  the  United  States  has  been  called  to  another  field  of 
usefulness,  so  that  our  American  portion  of  the  Association 
labors  under  the  disadvantage  of  a double  change. 

It  would  be  an  unpardonable  ingratitude  on  our  part,  were 
we  to  pass  over  the  memory  of  our  late  Director-General  and 
our  former  Central  Director,  without  recalling  the  important 
services  they  have  rendered  to  the  League  of  the  Sacred 
Heart.  The  name  of  our  former  Central  Director  has  been 
identified  with  the  work  of  the  League  for  the  past  fifteen 
years,  while  Father  Luis  Martin  was  Father-General  of  the 


B°8T0KC 


2 Letter  of  Central  Director. 

• 

Society  of  Jesus  since  the  autumn  of  1892.  During  the  period 
of  their  admirfistration  His  Holiness  Pope  Leo  XIII- pro- 
claimed the  new  Constitution  of  the  Apostleship  of  Prayer, 
which  gave  the  Association  a canonically  legal  standing  in  the 
Church;  during  the  same  period  the  Diocesan  Directors  were 
first  appointed,  the  number  of  members  began  to  outgrow  all 
previous  record,  and  the  Apostleship  flourished  as  it  had  never 
done  before.  We  know  that  all  good  gifts  come  from  above, 
and  that  our  present  flourishing  condition  is  due  to  the  love 
of  the  Sacred  Heart  and  the  grace  of  the  Holy  Ghost  rather 
than  to  any  human  instrument.  At  the  same  time,  God  s 
grace  and  love  do  not  work  among  men  without  the  instru- 
mentality of  human  aid ; and  it  is  in  this  sense  that  we  here 
publicly  acknowledge  the  services  of  our  late  efficient  leaders, 
and  tender  them  at  the  same  time  the  expression  of  our  sin- 
cerest  gratitude. 

And  in  order,  that  this  manifestation  of  our  feelings  may 
not  remain  an  idle  expression  of  sentiment,  we  must  show  by 
our  conduct  that  we  appreciate  the  worth  of  those  men  whom 
it  has  been  our  privilege  to  have  for  so  long  a period  for  our 
Directors.  If  there  is  any  quality  for  which  both  were  noted, 
it  is  their  untiring  activity,  their  live  interest  in  their  charge. 
They  thoroughly  realized  that  the  Apostleship  of  Prayer  is 
a mighty  lever  for  good ; but  they  realized  that  it  is  only  a 
lever,  that  it  is  not  a sacrament  which  works  ex  opere  operato, 
as  theologians  would  say.  The  Apostleship  is  a powerful 
spiritual  engine ; but  even  the  most  perfect  of  engines  does  not 
work  without  a supply  of  power.  What  does  one  get  out  of 
an  engine?  Precisely  what  one  puts  into  it.  The  engine 
economizes  the  power,  and  applies  it  to  the  best  advantage 
in  order  to  obtain  certain  definite  results.  Even  so  it  is  in 
the  case  of  the  Apostleship  of  Prayer. 

Our  late  Directors  were  not  content  with  merely  holding 
the  Diplomas  of  their  respective  Directorships ; they  did  not 
lay  their  hands  in  their  laps,  merely  watching,  as  it  were,  the 
incense  of  prayer  ascending  from  the  Apostleship  day  after 

196198  •fFTJj! 


Letter  of  Central  Director. 


3 


day  to  the  Mercy  Seat  of  God,  and  the  rain  of  natural  and 
supernatural  blessings  pouring  in  answer  to  these  prayers 
upon  our  suffering  and  sin-laden  world.  Not  as  if  such  a 
sight  were  not  most  edifying  and  helpful ; it  is  good  and  use- 
ful in  its  own  time,  but  as  a general  rule  the  machine  must 
be  watched,  and  the  supply  of  power  must  be  kept  in  view. 

It  is  true  that  the  machinery  of  our  Association  is  most 
simple : the  Director-General,  the  Diocesan  Directors,  the 
Local  Directors,  and  the  Promoters  constitute  practically  our 
entire  official  personel.  But  this  simplicity  does  not  do  away 
with  the  need  of  active  interest  on  the  part  of  each  officer. 
Even  the  old  pagan  philosopher  reduced  all  movement  to  the 
prime  mover ; the  nature  of  things  has  not  changed  since  his 
time,  so  that  in  our  days,  too,  all  movement  is  in  proportion 
to  the  activity  of  the  prime  mover.  Thanks  be  to  God  for  the 
amount  of  consoling  news  which  our  mail  man  brings  us 
almost  daily ; but  we  thank  the  Directors  too  for  the  zeal  they 
display.  Of  the  11,584  churches  and  2,206  pious  Institutions 
in  the  United  States,  5,144  churches  and  1,541  pious  Institu- 
tions are  now  aggregated  to  the  Apostleship  of  Prayer.  There 
are,  therefore,  in  all,  6,685  Local  Centers  in  the  United  States. 
In  order  to  show  that  the  League  is  not  at  a stand-still,  we 
may  mention  that  of  these  6,685  Local  Centers,  948  have  been 
aggregated  since  January,  1902;  of  these  new  aggregations, 
800  were  churches,  and  146  pious  Institutions.  And  the  spread 
of  Promoters  has  kept  an  even  pace  with  the  erection  of  new 
Centers.  During  the  past  five  years  28,331  Promoters  re- 
ceived their  Cross  and  Diploma.  The  present  status  of  the 
Apostleship  becomes  more  satisfactory  still,  if  we  consider 
that  of  the  11,814  churches,  3,941  are  missionary  posts  with 
no  resident  priest ; many  of  these  belong  to  the  Local  Centers 
of  those  churches  from  which  they  are  attended. 

But  consoling  as  these  figures  may  be,  they  are  not  such  as 
to  warrant  the  Directors  to  rest  satisfied  with  our  present 
condition.  If  the  Diocesan  Directors  look  over  the  list  of 
Local  Centers  situated  in  their  respective  dioceses,  they  will 


4 


Letter  of  Central  Director. 


notice  that  many  parishes  within  the  sphere  of  their  Director- 
ship are  not  as  yet  aggregated  to  our  Association.  In  the 
same  way,  the  Local  Directors  need  only  consult  their  Registers 
in  order  to  become  convinced  that  a great  number  of  parish- 
ioners are  not  as  yet  members  of  the  Apostleship  of  Prayer. 
The  Directors  are  well  acquainted  with  the  staple  exception 
that  the  other  pious  Associations  must  be  allowed  to  exist, 
that  the  parishes  or  parishioners  not  aggregated  to  the  Apos- 
tleship belong  to  sodalities  and  other  religious  societies.  Need 
we  repeat  the  assurance  that  the  League  does  not  interfere 
with  any  other  pious  union?  It  does  not  impose  any  obliga- 
tion at  variance  with  the  requirements  of  any  sodality  or  so- 
ciety. At  the  same  time,  it  infuses  into  all  its  members  a spirit 
that  will  make  better  sodalists,  better  parishioners,  better 
Catholics. 

Not  as  if  we  expected  the  Directors  to  exercise  their  energy 
in  directions  foreign  to  their  position.  The  Diocesan  Directors 
are  supposed  to  assist  the  priests  in  their  respective  dioceses 
to  organize  or  reorganize  the  League,  by  directing  them  per- 
sonally or  by  letters,  by  preaching,  or  by  forming  Centers  for 
them.  If  their  other  duties  should  ever  interfere  with  these 
obligations,  we  shall  be  only  too  glad  to  perform  this  service 
for  them,  either  by  corresponding  with  Local  Directors,  or, 
so  far  as  time  and  distance  permit,  by  preaching,  or  organizing 
Centers.  The  Diocesan  Director  will  fail  in  his  duty  if  he  is 
not  able  and  ready  to  give  every  applicant  for  aggregation 
the  benefit  of  his  own  example  and  experience  in  managing  a 
well  organized  Center,  to  make  suggestions  for  improving  the 
work,  to  solve  difficulties,  satisfy  complaints,  and  clear  up 
misunderstandings.  Your  zeal  will  suggest  to  you  the  proper 
occasions  on  which  your  work  may  be  done  most  advanta- 
geously : when  you  meet  your  fellow-priests  in  Conference, 
Retreat,  or  Synod,  when  pastors  are  changed,  or  new  parishes 
are  erected.  Any  help  or  direction  you  need  in  the  perfor- 
mance of  these  various  duties,  we  shall  be  only  too  happy  to 
give. 


Letter  of  Central  Director. 


5 


The  Local  Directors,  too,  have  their  own  peculiar  sphere  of 
duties : they  must  recommend  and  explain  the  General  Inten- 
tion every  month,  they  must  keep  the  Register  of  Aggregation 
faithfully,  distribute  the  members  among  the  bands  of  Pro- 
moters most  advantageously,  regulate  the  monthly  com- 
munions, supervise  the  distribution  of  Leaflets,  select  and  train 
Promoters,  and  above  all  hold  the  monthly  Promoters’  meet- 
ings. In  their  dealing  with  Promoters,  they  ought  to  proceed 
without  any  respect  for  person ; Promoters  should  be  chosen 
from  every  class  of  society,  from  among  men  as  well  as 
women ; they  should  be  advanced  according  to  their  degree 
of  efficiency,  and  they  ought  to  be  replaced  as  soon  as  they 
show  themselves  inefficient  in  the  discharge  of  their  various 
duties.  The  Local  Director  must  urge  the  various  practices 
of  the  Apostleship,  the  Morning  Offering,  the  daily  Decade  of 
Hail  Marys,  the  Communion  of  Reparation,  and  the  Holy 
Hour ; he  must  be  exacting  in  his  members’  attention  to  the 
Treasury  of  Good  Works,  to  the  reading  of  the  Leaflets  and 
of  the  Messenger  of  the  Sacred  Heart.  If  the  Local  Director 
is  attentive  to  his  duties,  the  First  Friday  will  be  a red  letter 
day  in  the  life  of  the  parish,  not  merely  in  its  female  but  also 
in  its  male  contingent. 

We  have  compared  the  Apostleship  of  Prayer  to  an  engine: 
the  Directors  are  the  engineers ; but  whence  comes  the  power  ? 
The  power  is  the  love  of  the  Sacred  Heart.  Our  Association 
is  the  Apostleship  of  Prayer  in  League  with  the  Sacred  Heart. 
It  is  with  a view  of  increasing  this  power  that  I forward  with 
this  letter  a Theological  Study  of  the  Devotion  to  the  Sacred 
Heart.  The  author,  who  is  one  of  Europe's  foremost  Canon- 
ists, clearly  distinguishes  between  what  is  certain  and  what 
is  merely  probable  in  his  treatise ; the  reader  may  disagree  with 
the  writer  on  controverted  points,  but  he  cannot  afford  to 
neglect  this  pamphlet.  On  our  part,  we  present  it  to  the  Dio- 
cesan and  Local  Directors  for  the  love  of  the  Sacred  Heart ; 
let  the  Directors  for  the  love  of  that  same  Heart  sacrifice 
enough  of  their  time  to  read  and  study  it.  If  they  are  faithful 


G 


Letter  of  Central  Director. 


to  their  part  of  this  compact,  both  Directors  and  members  of 
the  Apostleship  of  Prayer  in  the  United  States  will  be  animated 
with  a new  degree  of  love  for  the  Sacred  Heart,  a gift  more 
precious  than  any  “ Merry  Christmas  ” or  “ Happy  New 
Year  ” wishes  they  may  receive  from  their  earthly  friends. 

In  union  with  your  prayers  and  holy  sacrifices, 

Yours  sincerely  in  Christ, 

A.  J.  Maas,  S.J. 

Central  Office  of  the  Apostleship  of  Prayer, 

27-29  West  16th  Street,  New  York. 

On  the  Feast  of  Blessed  Margaret  Mary. 


The  Proper  Object 

of  the 

Devotion  to  the  Sacred  Heart 


A THEOLOGICAL  STUDY 


By  the 

Rev.  A.  Vermeersch,  S.J. 


Translation  and  Reprint  of  Two  Articles  Published  in  the  Etudes 
for  January  20  and  February  20,  1906 

With  a Letter  of  the  Central  Director  to  all  Diocesan  and  Local  Directors 


Apostleship  of  Prayer, 
27-29  W.  1 6th  St.,  New  York. 


PX- 

/A57 

• V/fX 


Respectfully  Dedicated 
to  the 

Diocesan  and  Local  Directors  of  the  Apostleship  of  Prayer 

in  the 

United  States  of  North  America. 


CONTENTS. 


Letter  of  Central  Director 1 

Introduction  11 

Chapter  I.  Preliminary  Ideas : General  View  of  Devo- 
tions, Sources  to  be  consulted. 13 

Chapter  II.  The  Proper  and  Direct  Object  of  the  Wor- 
ship: the  Human,  Living  Heart  of  Our  Lord  Jesus 

Christ  16 

Chapter  III.  The  Living  Heart  of  the  Redeemer  Con- 
sidered in  Connection  with  Love 18 

Chapter  IV.  The  Proper  Object  of  the  Devotion  to  the 
Sacred  Heart  is  the  Heart  of  Christ  as  a Real  Symbol 

of  His  Love 20 

(j)  What  is  a Symbol? 21 

( 2 ) The  Heart  is  a Symbol  of  Human  Affections.  . 22 

(j)  The  Heart  of  Christ  is  Taken  as  a Symbol.  ...  23 

(4)  Important  Corollary:  the  Material  and  Formal 

Object  of  the  Devotion 24 

Chapter  V.  The  Love  of  Which  the  Heart  of  Jesus  is 

the  Symbol  27 

(1)  The  Mystery  of  the  Incarnation.  Created  and 

Uncreated  Love.  The  Question  Considered  from 
This  Point  of  View 28 

(2)  Authors’  Opinions  . 30 

Preliminary  Observations  30 

Father  de  La  Colmbiere,  S.J 32 

Father  Croiset,  S.J o. 

Father  Froment,  S.J 33 

Father  de  Gallifet,  S.J 34 

Cardinal  Gerdil 35 

Benoit  Tetamo,  S.J 35 

Emmanuel  Marques  35 

Frangois- Antoine  Zaccaria,  S.J 36 

Muzzarelli  37 

Father  Roothaan,  S.J 37 


10 


Contents. 


Father  Gautrelet,  S.J 38 

Cardinal  Franzelin,  S.J 38 

Fathers  de  San  and  Nilles,  S.J 38 

Canon  Leroy  39 

Father  Bucceroni,  S.J 39 

Father  Bernard  Dalgairns 39 

Father  Chevalier  39 

Father  Billot,  S.J 39 

Fathers  A.  Martorell  and  Joseph  Castella,  S.J.  . . 40 

Father  J.  B.  Terrien,  S.J 40 

Abbe  Baruteil  41 

Father  Thill  41 

(j)  Decree  of  the  Holy  See:  Memorial  of  Polish 
Bishops,  Clement  XIII,  Pius  VI,  Pius  VII,  Pius 
IX,  Fathers  of  the  Vatican  Council,  Congrega- 
tion of  Rites,  Pauline  Epistles 42 

( 4 ) A Theological  Examination  of  the  Question:  48 

A.  In  What  Sense  Uncreated  Love  is  Necessarily 

Understood  in  the  Devotion  to  the  Sacred 
Heart  49 

B.  The  Value  and  Dignity  of  Christ’s  Created 

Love  50 

C.  Why  the  Special  Reason  for  the  Devotion  to 

the  Sacred  Heart  is  Furnished  by  Created,  Not 
Uncreated,  Love  52 

D.  How  in  a Broad  Sense  Uncreated  Love  May 
Become  the  Special  Object  of  the  Devotion  to 

the  Sacred  Heart 56 

E.  Conclusions  and  Corollaries 59 

Chapter  VI.  Devotion  to  the  Blessed  Sacrament  Com- 
pared with  the  Devotion  to  the  Sacred  Heart 63 

Chapter  VII.  Devotion  to  the  Holy  Ghost  Compared 

with  the  Devotion  to  the  Sacred  Heart  of  Jesus.  ...  65 

Appendix,  i.  Devotion  to  the  Eucharistic  Heart  of  Jesus. 

2.  The  Practice  of  the  Devotion  to  the  Heart  of  Jesus, 
j.  Acts  of  Devotion.  t , 67 


THE  PROPER  OBJECT  OF  THE  DEVOTION 
TO  THE  SACRED  HEART. 

A Theological  Study.  (1) 


Introduction. 

Although  devotions  which  are  already  prosperous  thrive 
on  reinforcement  of  light  and  heat,  there  is  nevertheless  a 
certain  exuberance  of  life  that  is  prejudicial  to  them.  Too 
many  minds  have  but  an  inadequate  knowledge  of  them  and 
this,  coupled  with  a desire  for  novelty  or  originality,  is  seri- 
ously apt  to  engender  mistakes  and  errors.  Side  by  side  with 
elaborations  which  are  really  precious  for  the  defense  or  clear 
understanding  of  a form  or  practice  of  worship,  *are  those 
which  so  distort  the  object  of  that  worship  as  to  misdirect 
both  thought  and  homage.  An  indiscreet  zeal  will  so  dilate 
upon  the  special  value  of  a devotion  as  to  lessen  rather  than 
increase  its  influence  and  utility,  and  it  is  above  all  after  the 

(1)  This  article  is  intended  to  refute^  a specious  and  seductive 
opinion  now  gaining  ground  and  in  which  we  cannot  fail  to  see  unfor- 
tunate blunders  and  confusion.  The  relative  favor  which  it  enjoys 
would  seem  to  us  due  to  an  inadequate  understanding  of  the  subject, 
and  we  have  thought  to  further  the  interests  of  the  true  devotion  to 
the  Sacred  Heart  by  awakening  serious  reflection  on  a question  which 
we  know  is  already  receiving  great  attention  in  Germany  and  Austria. 
The  hearty  welcome  heretofore  accorded  our  article  on  The  Great 
Promise  by  the  readers  of  Etudes  has  naturally  inspired  us  to  dedicate 
this  new  work  to  them. 


11 


12 


Introduction. 


triumph  of  a cause,  when  we  withdraw  our  attention  from  a 
tedious  opposition  at  length  reduced  to  silence,  that  curiosity 
and  a fear  of  the  commonplace  threaten  to  mislead  us.  “ I 
will  not  speak  to  you  of  the  Sacred  Heart,”  wrote  Mgr. 
d’Hulst,  May  31,  1883.(1)  “It  has  already  been  too  deeply 
wronged  by  over-ardent  enthusiasts.  Our  Lord  Himself  must 
tell  you  of  It;  we  speak  of  It  too  unworthily.” 

These  words  are  most  significant:  they  justify  our  first 
pages  wherein  we  propose  to  write  simply  of  the  object  of 
the  devotion  that  we  may  write  of  it  well.  A first  section  will 
contain  some  preliminary  remarks,  and  the  three  following 
will  succinctly  set  forth  ideas  supported  by  a concise  demon- 
stration, and  so  generally  accepted  as  to  be  considered  definitely 
established.  Hence,  by  passing  through  these  successive 
stages  we  will  come  into  possession  of  the  light  prepared 
by  preceding  works  for  friends  of  the  devotion  to  the  Sacred 
Heart.  All  honor  to  our  illustrious  predecessors ! 

Now,  however  important  these  generally  accepted  ideas, 
they  do  not  furnish  a definition  of  the  object  in  all  its  bear- 
ings and,  as  we  shall  see,  at  least  one  of  these  remains  ob- 
scure. Although  we  do  not  deem  the  solution  of  the  question 
difficult,  it  is  certainly  worthy  of  any  effort  entailed,  since  it 
deals  with  the  mystery  of  the  Incarnation  of  the  Word,  a 
mystery  so  dear  to  our  hearts ; it  influences  preaching  and, 
in  itself  a sufficient  advantage,  states  most  accurately  the 
object  of  the  great  devotion  of  our  time,  the  devotion  to  the 
Sacred  Heart.  Impelled  by  a desire  to  elucidate  this  ques- 
tion, we  shall  endeavor  to  do  so  in  a fifth  section. 

The  last  two  sections  may  be  called  complementary;  we 
shall  compare  the  devotion  to  the  Sacred  Heart  with  the 
devotion  to  the  Blessed  Sacrament  and  the  worship  of  the 
Holy  Ghost  in  order,  by  this  comparison,  to  throw  into  as 
strong  a light  as  possible  the  complete  and  exact  object  of 
the  homage  which  we  pay  to  the  Heart  of  our  Saviour,  Jesus 
Christ. 


(l)  Letters  of  Direction,  p.  74. 


Preliminary  Ideas. 


13 


In  the  Appendix  we  shall  say  a few  words  on  devotion  to 
the  Eucharistic  Heart  of  Jesus,  and  dwell  briefly  on  the  prac- 
tice  of  devotion  to  the  Sacred  Heart  as  it  has  been  taught  us 
by  two  of  its  greatest  promoters  and  exponents,  Fathers 
Croiset  and  de  Gallifet. 

In  discussing  the  question  which,  above  all,  has  captivated 
our  interest,  it  is  impossible  to  avoid  partial  disagreement  with 
writers  for  whom  we  otherwise  profess  the  greatest  esteem ; 
but  surely  they  should  be  neither  astonished  nor  offended  by 
a contradiction,  prompted  as  they  are  by  such  a desire  as  actu- 
ates them,  to  extend  the  true  reign  of  the  Heart  of  Jesus. 
However,  though  indicating  in  perfectly  good  faith,  the  errors 
or  inaccuracies  of  others,  we  ourselves  are  laying  no  claim  to 
infallibility.  Prior  to  writing  we  joined  much  reading  to  our 
personal  reflections,  and  submitted  our  ideas  to  several  judges 
especially  well  versed  in  theological  science.  Encouraged  by 
their  approbation,  we  offer  our  conclusions  to  the  public, 
though  not  without  the  sincere  assurance  of  our  willingness  to 
surrender  to  stronger  arguments. 

CHAPTER  I. 

Preliminary  Ideas. 

General  View  of  Devotions. — When  considering  that  which 
prompts  honor  and  homage,  and  to  what  they  are  directed, 
we  should  distinguish  between  the  person  who  receives,  the 
excellence  which  justifies,  and  the  manifestation  which  occa- 
sions them. 

Homage  is  always  received  by  a person  and  proportioned  to 
his  dignity.  (1) 

Some  special  quality  of  such  a person,  more  frequently  than 
his  entire  personality,  entitles  him  to  homage,  and  is  the  ex- 
cellence prompting  it,  or,  to  speak  philosophically,  constitutes 
its  formal  object. 

This  quality  is  gathered  by  its  manifestations : if  it  does  not 


(1)  Saint  Thomas’s  Summa  theol.,  part  III,  p.  XXV,  a.  1. 


14  Preliminary  Ideas. 

flash  out  from  some  part  of  the  person  it  is  demonstrated  by 
acts  and  works. 

Thus,  even  in  the  human  order,  we  accord  a king  the  royal 
honor  due  to  his  character,  while  at  the  same  time  we  admire 
the  masculine  beauty  of  his  features,  and  do  homage  to  his 
intellectual  abilities  as  shown  by  the  wisdom  of  his  adminis- 
tration, and  the  goodness  of  his  heart  as  manifested  by  his 
benefactions. 

We  might  say  indifferently  that  we  specially  honor  the 
king  because  of  his  beauty,  his  intellect  or  his  heart,  or  that 
we  admire  his  beauty,  praise  his  intelligence  and  extol  his 
goodness. 

Applied  to  the  worship  of  the  Sacred  Heart,  these  simple 
reflections  show  us  that,  by  this  worship,  we  honor  the  Person 
of  Our  Lord  Jesus  Christ;  that  it  is  the  supreme  worship  due 
to  God  alone,  as  Jesus  Christ  is  God(l)  adorable  in  all  that 
is  united  to  His  Person,  particularly  in  His  Heart;  and  that 
it  is  a special  worship  inasmuch  as  it  is  prompted  by  a quality 
which  the  heart  possesses  or  represents. 

The  Person  of  Our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  its  excellences,  all  of 
which  are  infinite  in  dignity,  are  the  common  object,  the  gen- 
eral reason  of  all  the  feasts  and  of  all  the  devotions  by  which 
Our  Lord  is  glorified.  In  order  to  become  acquainted  with 
the  proper  object  or  the  special  justification  of  the  devotion  to 
the  Sacred  Heart  and  of  the  corresponding  feast,  it  is  neces- 
sary to  understand  what  is  meant  by  the  Heart  of  Our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ,  under  what  aspect  it  is  considered,  and  what 
quality  attracts  our  homage.  It  is,  therefore,  around  these 
points  that  the  interest  of  our  study  centers. 

Sources  to  be  consulted.  In  all  questions  of  worship  the 
science  of  revelation  should  be  carefully  consulted.  All  in- 
terpretations which  contradict  its  indubitable  teachings  are 
false,  and  such  as  do  not  tally  with  its  principles  and  traditions 
on  the  economy  of  our  salvation  are  questionable ; whilst  a 
favorable  pre judgment  militates  for  a theory  that  harmonizes 

(1)  Later  on  we  shall  explain  in  fuller  detail  how  Jesus  Christ  is 
adorable  even  in  His  humanity. 


Preliminary  Ideas. 


15 


with  the  general  principles  of  theology.  Besides  this  rather 
negative  mission,  theology  has  another,  that,  of  showing  in  the 
deposit  of  faith  the  indispensable  foundation  of  every  solid 
devotion. 

Great  devotions  have  their  genesis,  their  history.  Most  fre- 
quently their  beginnings  are  connected  with  some  extraordi- 
nary providential  event  and  with  an  initiative  which  at  first 
suffers  opposition,  then  triumphs,  and,  after  a series  of  tests, 
at  length  wins  the  approbation  and  later  the  encouragement 
of  ecclesiastical  authority.  The  opinion  of  those  who  pro- 
moted it,  and  above  all  those  decrees  of  the  Holy  See  which 
confirm  or  correct  it,  will  furnish  the  principal  elements  of 
positive  explanation. 

The  study  and  discussion  of  these  elements  lead  to  a more 
distinct  and  adequate  understanding  of  the  object  and  nature 
of  the  worship. 

By  way  of  resume  the  following  formula  might  be  proposed : 
A knowledge  of  " the  proper  object  of  the  devotion  to  the 
Sacred  Heart  springs  chiefly  from  the  theological  examination 
of  data  furnished  by  the  origin  of  the  devotion  and  the  de- 
cisions of  the  Holy  See. 

In  corroboration  of  these  statements  we  quote  two  testi- 
monies. 

The  worship  of  the  Sacred  Heart  is  no  longer  a private  one 
but  has  become  public,  and  in  all  churches  the  feast  of  the 
Sacred  Heart  is  celebrated.  “ Therefore/’  says  Father 
Nilles(l)  “ the  decrees  and  public  acts  of  the  Holy  See  should 
be  referred  to,  and  the  classic  authors  who  have  treated  the 
question  be  consulted.”  And  Father  de  Gallifet,  the  prin- 
cipal private  authority  to  be  invoked,  says: (2)  “Since  the 
devotion  to  the  Sacred  Heart  of  Jesus  had  its  origin  in  a 
heavenly  revelation,  in  this  revelation  must  be  sought  ^the 
object  of  worship,  and  the  manner  in  which  the  devotion 
should  be  practiced.” 

(1)  De  Rationibus  festorum  SS.  Cordis  Iesu,  etc.,  1.  p.  328. 

(2)  De  Cultu  Sacrosancti  Cordis,  etc.,  book  I,  chap.  IV. 


16 


The  Proper  and  Direct  Object  of  Worship. 


CHAPTER  II. 

The  Proper  and  Direct  Object  of  Worship:  the  Human, 
Living  Heart  of  Our  Lord  Jesus  Christ. 

The  object  of  the  devotion  to  the  Sacred  Heart  of  Jesus  is, 
first  of  all,  the  real , living  Heart  that  beats  in  the  bosom  of 
Our  Saviour,  that  forms  a part  of  His  humanity  and  was 
pierced  on  the  cross.  In  His  great  apparitions  to  Blessed 
Margaret  Mary,  Our  Lord  discloses  this  real,  living  heart, 
and  when  the  heart  is  separately  represented  the  wound  in- 
flicted on  the  cross  figures  prominently.  For  a conclusive 
proof  a line  taken  from  the  account  of  the  most  solemn  mani- 
festation with  which  the  Blessed  one  was  favored  should 
suffice : “ And  showing  me  His  Heart,  He  said : ‘ Behold  the 
Heart  which  has  loved  men  so  much.’”(l) 

A peremptory  argument  is  likewise  furnished -by  the  apos- 
tolic constitution  Auctorem  fidei,  of  August  28,  1794.  In 
condemning  the  63rd  proposition  of  the  Jansenistic  Synod  of 
Pistoja,  Pius  VI  clearly  acknowledges  in  this  constitution 
that  the  faithful  adore  the  Heart  of  Jesus,  that  is  to  say,  the 
Heart  of  the  Person  of  the  Word,  the  Heart  indissolubly 
united  to  this  Person  in  the  same  way  in  which,  after  death, 
His  Body,  inseparable  from  His  Divinity  and  without  making 
abstraction  of  it,  was  adorable  in  the  tomb. (2) 

The  last  words  of  Pius  VI  are  sufficiently  clear:  the  heart 
is  not  isolated  and,  as  it  were,  extracted  from  the  Body ; we 
honor  a Heart  intimately  united  to  the  Soul  of  Jesus  and  to 
His  Divine  Person,  “ the  Heart  which,  with  the  Soul  of  Jesus 
and  His  Divine  Person,  constitutes  a single  object  of  adora- 
tion. . . . This  object,”  continues  Father  de  Gallifet,  “ is 

formed  of  the  Heart  of  Jesus,  the  Soul  of  Jesus,  and  the 
Person  of  the  Son  of  God,  by  joining  thereunto  all  the  graces, 

(1)  Life  and  Works  of  Blessed  Margaret  Mary  Alacoque,  vol.  II,  pp. 
270,  327,  355. 

(2)  “ Illud  adorant  ut  est  cor  Jesu,  cor  nempe  personae  Verbi,  cui 
inseparabiliter  unitum  est,  ad  enm  modum  quo  exsangue  corpus  Christi, 
in  triduo  mortis,  sine  separatione  aut  praecisione  a divinitate,  adorabile 
fuit  in  sepulcro.” 


The  Proper  and  Direct  Object  of  Worship.  17 

all  the  treasures  of  heavenly  gifts,  all  the  virtues  and  all  the 
affections  peculiar  to  that  Heart.”  (1) 

This  point  is  therefore  well  established.  In  our  devotion 
the  word  heart  is  not  a metaphorical  term  used  to  convey  the 
idea  of  love,  and  if,  as  we  shall  see,  this  idea  dominates,  it 
cannot  therefore  be  said  that  the  worship  is  improperly  called 
that  of  the  Sacred  Heart  and  is  in  reality  the  devotion  of  the 
love  of  Christ  irrespective  of  the  Heart  of  Flesh  which  repre- 
sents that  love.  Such  was  the  view  held  by  Catholics  hostile 
to  the  devotion,  when  the  decree  of  approbation  appeared  in 
1765.(2)  According  to  this  document  the  worship  of  the 
Sacred  Heart  consisted  in  symbolically  renewing  our  love  of 
the  Son  of  God,  etc.  Mistaking  the  value  of  the  term  “ sym- 
bolic renewal,”  a certain  Blasius,  together  with  others  of  the 
same  school,  maintained  that,  in  the  decree,  there  was  no 
question  of  honoring  a heart  of  flesh  but  a purely  symbolic 
heart,  or,  to  be  more  accurate, (3)  a heart  in  the  general  sense, 
taken  metaphorically  for  the  affections. (4)  But  besides  the 
fact  that  “ the  symbolic  renewal  ” supposes  a real  symbol, 
viz.,  the  living  Heart  of  Christ,  it  suffices  to  refute  this  system 
to  recall  that  the  decrees  approved  the  devotion  such  as  it  had 
been  represented  by  the  bishops  of  Poland  in  their  petition 
wherein  they  stated  that  they  understood  the  word  heart  in  its 
proper  sense  and  not  metaphorically. (5)  And  in  regard  to 
this  Zaccaria  declared : “ The  feast  of  a purely  symbolic 

heart  will  never  be,  either  properly  or  improperly,  a feast  of 
the  Sacred  Heart  of  Jesus.” (6) 

Devotion  to  the  Sacred  Heart  honors  the  real  Heart  of 
Jesus;  in  section  3rd  we  shall  see  under  what  aspect. 

(1)  De  Cultu  . . . , book  I,  chap.  IV.  Benedict  XIV  mentions 

this  idea  as  that  of  the  promoters  of  the  devotion.  (De  Beatidcatione, 
book  IV,  chap.  XXXI.  n.  21.) 

(2)  The  decree  will  be  quoted  later  on  among  the  documents  of  the 
Holy  See. 

(3)  A symbolic  heart  may  be  a very  real  heart.  See  section  IV. 

(4)  See,  for  example,  Franzelin’s  De  Verbo  incarnato  3,  pp.  470,  471. 

(5)  Cor  Jesu,  non  tralatitie  sumptum,  sed  in  propria  ac  nativa  signid- 
catione,  videlicet  ut  est  pars  corporis  Christi  nobilissima. 

(6)  Fr.  Ant.  Zaccaria,  Antidoto  contra  i libri  di  Blasi  . . . lett 

VI,  p.  61. 


18 


The  Living  Heart  in  Connection  with  Love. 


CHAPTER  III. 

The  Living  Heart  of  the  Redeemer  Considered  in  Con- 
nection with  Love. 

To  ask  how  the  Divine  Heart  of  Jesus  is  regarded  in  the 
practice  of  the  devotion  is  to  inquire  into  the  quality  which 
makes  the  heart  the  proper  object  of  this  devotion,  viz.,  to 
seek  the  formal  element  of  this  object  and  the  special  aspect 
under  which  it  is  considered;  just  as  upon  investigating  we 
find  that  color  is  the  formal  object  of  sight  and  sound  the 
formal  object  of  hearing,  because  the  eye  perceives  an  object 
inasmuch  as  it  is  colored  and  the  ear  detects  it  inasmuch  as  it 
is  sonorous. 

The  living  Heart  is  a part  of  Our  Lord’s  Body,  and,  as 
such,  it  is  adorable.  But  it  is  not  therefore  chosen  as  the 
object  of  a special  devotion.  If  it  were,  why  should  not  all 
other  parts  of  Christ’s  Body,  though  lacking  sentiment,  knowl- 
edge and  affection,  just  as  well  be  glorified,  and,  as  was  ob- 
jected by  the  Promoter  of  the  Faith,  there  would  then  be  as 
many  feasts  as  the  body  has  parts  or  members.  But  of  course 
such  a view  was  never  seriously  entertained.  (1) 

Now,  the  heart  is  chosen  because  it  is  overflowing  with  love 
for  men  and  wounded  by  their  ingratitude.  Thus  we  find  in 
the  revelations  of  Blessed  Margaret  Mary : “ Behold  the 

Heart  which  has  loved  men  so  much.  . . . Instead  of 

gratitude,  I receive  from  the  greater  part  (of  mankind)  only 
ingratitude  and  Father  de  Gallifet  tells  us(2)  that  there  is  a 
like  expression  in  the  Memorial  offered  to  the  Congregation  of 
Rites  under  Benedict  XIII. (3) 

1.  We  say  overflowing  with  love,  not  that  the  heart  must 
necessarily  be  considered  the  seat  of  sensible  affections — the 
Sacred  Congregation  wishing  to  avoid  a philosophical  con- 
troversy opposed  at  the  very  outset  by  the  Promoter  of  the 

(1)  Defenders’  reply  to  the  objections  of  the  Promoter  of  the  Faith. 

(Nilles,  De  Rationibus.  . . . V,  n.  17,  p.  145.) 

(2)  De  Cnltu  . . . , book  I,  chap.  IV. 

(3)  Cor  quatenus  amove  hominum  ardentissimum , pro  peccatis  atHic- 
tissimum. 


The  Living  Heart  in  Connection  with  Love.  10 

Faith,  the  future  Pope,  Benedict  XIV(l) — but  because  there 
is  an  intimate,  undeniable  correspondence  between  the  move- 
ments of  the  heart  and  our  affections,  sensible  as  well  as  spir- 
itual, nay,  even  supernatural,  since  the  heart  feels  the  im- 
pressions of  our  affections. (2) 

Moreover,  the  wound  that  opened  this  Heart  betokened  an 
extreme  love,  a love  which  was  ready  to  sacrifice  even  life 
itself,  and  the  same  thought  is  expressed  when  it  is  said  that 
the  heart  is  taken  as  an  object  inasmuch  as  it  is  the  universally 
accepted  symbol  of  the  love  of  Christ.  However,  this  borders 
upon  matter  to  be  discussed  in  the  following  section,  and  we 
must  not  anticipate. 

2.  The  Heart,  as  we  have  said,  is  considered  as  wounded 
by  our  ingratitude.  This  point  is  demonstrated  by  the  words 
of  the  revelation  already  quoted:.  “Instead  of  gratitude,  i 
receive  from  the  greater  part  (of  mankind)  only  ingratitude. 

. . . But  what  is  still  more  painful  to  Me  is  that  they  are 

hearts  consecrated  to  Me.”  At  any  rate,  this  is  admitted  with- 
out dispute.  Father  de  Gallifet  says  {op.  cit.}  Book  I,  chap. 
IV)  : “ For  the  perfect  understanding  of  this  worship  it  is 
not  enough  to  consider  the  Heart  of  Jesus  as  united  to  His 
Divinity  and  overflowing  with  love  for  men  and.  for  this 
twofold  reason,  worthy  of  our  adoration  and  love ; we  must 
likewise  consider  the  cruel  insults  which  It  suffered  from 
the  ingratitude  of  men,  the  atrocious  injuries  heaped  upon  It 
and  that  It  therefore  merits  not  only  our  love  but  also,  if  we 
may  be  permitted  so  to  speak,  our  sympathy  and  compassion.” 

Our  Saviour  suffered  grievously  in  His  mortal  life, (3)  and 
especially  on  the  night  of  His  agony  in  the  Garden  of  Olives 
when  He  was  in  the  agony  of  His  Passion  because  experi- 
encing the  passion  of  His  Heart. (4) 

(1)  De  Beatihcatione,  book  IV,  chap.  XXXI,  n.  25. 

(2)  Nilles,  De  Rationibus  . . . edit.  5,  p.  332  note. 

(3)  Olim,  “of  old,”  says  Father  de  Gallifet,  De  Cultn  . . . , 
book  I,  chap.  IV. 

(2)  “This  mystery  of  the  agony  is  a holy  of  holies.  It  is  the  heart 
of  the  passion  of  Christ,  because  it  is  the  passion  of  His  Heart.”  (Mgr. 
Gay  in  Meditations  on  the  Mysteries  of  the  Rosary.) 


20  The  Heart  of  Christ  as  a Symbol  of  His  Love. 

Without  debarring  other  conclusive  proofs  of  the  love  of 
Christ,  we  maintain  that  the  devotion  to  the  Sacred  Heart 
is  connected  chiefly  with  these  two:  the  sufferings  of  the 
Passion  and  the  institution  of  the  Holy  Eucharist.  According 
to  Blessed  Margaret  Mary,  scarcely  had  Our  Lord  repre- 
sented His  Heart  as  exhausting  Itself  in  conquering  men  by 
Its  tenderness,  than  He  complained  of  the  insults  of  which 
He  is  the  object  in  the  sacrament  of  His  love.  “ The  par- 
ticular object  of  this  devotion,”  says  Father  Croiset,(l)  “is 
the  immense  love  of  the  Son  of  God,  which  has  led  Him  to  de- 
liver Himself  up  to  death  for  us  and  to  give  Himself  entirely 
to  us  in  the  most  holy  Sacrament  of  the  Altar.”  “ The  Heart 
of  Jesus,”  adds  Father  de  San, (2)  “is,  in  a strict  sense,  the 
symbol  of  the  created  love  of  Christ  for  us,  above  all  of  the 
love  which  He  manifests-  for  us  in  His  passion  and  in  the 
Eucharist."  The  love  that  we  honor  and  that  is  referred  to  in 
the  sixth  lesson  of  the  Breviary  is  the  love  of  Our  suffering 
Saviour,  Who  instituted  the  sacrament  of  His  Body  and 
Blood  in  memory  of  His  death. 

Conclusion.  Father  de  Gallifet’s  definition  is  therefore 
justified:  The  worship  of  the  Sacred  Heart  honors  the  Divine 
Heart  of  Jesus  as  burning  with  love  for  nien  and  at  the  same 
time  deeply  wounded  (in  the  past)  because  of  the  insults  with 
which,  in  their  ungrateful  impiety,  these  men  overwhelm  It. (3) 

CHAPTER  IV.  • 

The  Proper  Object  of  the  Devotion  to  the  Sacred  Heart 
is  the  Heart  of  Christ,  as  a Real  Symbol 

of  His  Love. 

All  these  questions  are  interlinked.  We  have  asked  our- 
selves why  this  Heart  is  the  object  of  a special  devotion,  and 
have  found  that  it  is  because  of  the  bonds  uniting  It  to  the 
love  of  Jesus  Christ,  and  this  answer  suggests  a comple- 
mentary question : Why  choose  It  because  of  these  bonds  ? 

(1)  La  Devotion  au  Sacre  Cceur,  beginning  of  chap.  I,  part  I. 

(2)  De  Verbo  incarnato,  chap.  XXI. 

(3)  De  Cultu  . . . , book  III,  chap.  3. 


The  Heart  of  Christ  as  a Symbol  of  His  Love.  21 

To  this  we  would  reply:  Because  these  bonds  make  It  the 
universally  accepted  symbol  of  love  and,  on  that  account,  the 
best  sensible  representation  of  that  love. 

However,  if  we  would  pass  successfully  through  the  third 
stage  leading  to  a clear,  distinct  knowledge  of  the  object  of 
the  devotion  to  the  Sacred  Heart,  we  must  explain  symbolism. 

i.  A symbol  is  a sensible  reality,  taken  to  represent  another 
reality,  abstract  or  spiritual.  We  resort  to  concrete  symbols 
in  order  to  clothe  in  a material  form  better  adapted  to  our 
faculties,  spiritual  things  of  which  we  have  no  exact  concep- 
tion. 

This  substitution  of  one  reality  for  another  is  founded  on 
analogy  which  often  consists  in  resemblances  real  or  figura- 
tive, as  when  we  symbolize  purity  by  a white  lily;  meekness 
by  a lamb  or  a dove ; the  ardor  of  passion  by  a flame.  These 
resemblances  sometimes  lie  in  the  real  connection  between 
two  objects,  especially  that  uniting  cause  to  effect:  health, 
for  instance,  is  symbolized  by  the  flush  which  it  brings  to  the 
cheek;  intellect  by  the  head,  where,  on  account  of  the  brain, 
we  suppose  it  to  be  placed.  (1) 

Symbolism  founded  on  real  bonds  is  limited  to  the  object 
which  is  in  effective  correspondence  with  the  reality  sym- 
bolized. While  every  lion  may  symbolize  strength  and  every 


(l)  Although  both  are  founded  oh  resemblances  and  destined  to 
satisfy  our  need  of  concrete  representations,  symbols  and  metaphors 
are  separated  by  characteristic  differences  which  must  not  be  lost  to 
view.  A metaphor  distorts  the  real  meaning  of  a word ; a symbol 
preserves  it.  The  former  hides  the  object  usually  signified — as,  for 
instance,  a lion,  from  which  the  qualification  of  strength  is  withdrawn 
for  the  sake  of  clothing  another  object,  Achilles,  for  example.  A 
symbol  requires  that  the  object  itself  represent,  under  its  own  colors, 
another  object,  farther  removed,  more  abstract;  in  a metaphor  the 
word  causes  the  disappearance  of  a proximate  reality,  whereas  in 
a symbol  such  a reality  is  conveyed  by  the  word.  Moreover,  the  symbol 
enables  us  to  simplify,  synthetize  and  unify.  Thus,  a simple  flag 
represents  the  complex  idea  of  country,  fatherland.  We  cannot,  there- 
fore, approve  what  M.  Baruteil  wrote  in  his  Genese  du  culte  du 
'Sacre  Cceur,  p.  43).  “What,  then,  is  the  symbolic  heart?”  It  is 
nothing  but  the  reunion  of  the  real  heart  and  the  metaphorical  heart. 
Now,  in  the  same  expression  and  the  same  use,  the  word  is  not  at  once 
adapted  to  the  real  and  the  figurative  meaning.  A symbol  does  not 
suppose  a metaphor,  was  not  created  by  it;  rather  the  symbolical  use 
of  the  heart  has  made  the  metaphor.  The  symbolic  heart  is  the  real 
heart  in  its  real  function  of  symbolizing  love. 


22  The  Heart  of  Christ  as  a Symbol  of  His  Love. 

lamb  meekness,  only  one’s  health  is  really  symbolized  by  the 
flush  on  the  cheek  and  only  one’s  intellect  represented  by  the 
head.  Nevertheless,  bright  colors  may  serve  as  a symbol  of 
health  in  general  and  the  head  as  a symbol  of  intelligence ; 
but  as  soon  as  we  individualize  the  object  we  must  also  indi- 
vidualize this  kind  of  symbols. 

2.  Hence  it  is  easy  to  see  how  the  heart,  without  in  the  least 
resembling  love,  without  even  being  the  seat  of  any  affection . 
is  nevertheless  the  real  and  natural  symbol  of  the  human 
affections. 

On  the  one  hand,  although  the  heart  be  hidden  in  the  bosom, 
hearts  that  we  have  seen  enable  us  to  conceive  a clear  image 
of  the  heart  of  someone ; onr  the  other  hand,  although  we 
cannot  (at  least  at  the  present  time)(l)  read  in  the  heart 
the  sentiments  to  which  the  rhythm  of  its  movements  corre- 
sponds, this  correspondence  causes  us  to  attribute  to  it  these 
sentiments  themselves : we  localize  them  in  the  heart ; in  it 
we  seem  to  discern  the  principles  of  the  affections ; our  imag- 
ination pictures  it  under  that  form ; the  heart  becomes  the 
real  and  natural  symbol  of  love.  Father  Billot  could  therefore 
write : “ The  heart  is  the  symbol  of  love  because  it  is  its 

organ," (2)  an  indisputable  proposition  if  we  take  the  term 
organ  in  its  broad  acceptation,  supposing  nothing  but  simple 
repercussions. 

We  employ  this  symbolism  of  the  human  form  when  we 
represent  by  it  pure  spirits,  even  the  Divinity  Itself ; the  heart 
of  the  fictitious  body  with  which  we  endow  them  is  the 
symbol  of  their  love,  and  we  speak  of  the  Heart  of  God  as 
we  would  of  the  heart  of  man.  Only  here,  and  this  remark 
will  be  of  weight  in  what  follows,  the  reality  of  symbolism 
disappears  with  the  reality  of  the  body  and  the  heart : it  is 
as  purely  imaginary  as  the  entire  body  to  which  it  relates. 

There  is  a metaphor  connected  with  the  symbolism  of  the 
heart,  according  to  which  the  heart  signifies  the  will  inasmuch 
as  the  will  loves ; hence,  it  is  important  to  distinguish  carefully 

(1)  Some  physiologists  are  still  hopeful  of  reaching  this  point. 

(2)  De  Verbo  incarnato,  th.  36,  coroll.,  p.  332. 


The  Heart  of  Christ  as  a Symbol  of  His  Love.  23 

between  the  symbolic  aspect  peculiar  to  the  real  heart  and  the 
metaphorical  use  of  the  word  heart.  (1) 

These  explanations  clearly  set  forth  the  trend  and  meaning 
of  the  proposition:  In  the  devotion  to  the  Sacred  Heart,  the 
heart  is  not  taken  in  a metaphorical  sense  as  we  have  shown 
in  Section  II,  but  as  the  real  and  natural  symbol  of  love,  and 
this  brings  us  back  to  the  proposition  with  which  this  section 
was  opened,  a proposition  easily  demonstrated. 

j.  The  Heart  of  Christ  is  taken  as  a symbol.  The  Acts  of 
the  Holy  See,  beginning  with  the  first  decree  of  1765,  afford 
unvarying  proof  of  it.  They  mention  the  symbolic  renewal  of 
memory,  the  symbolic  image  of  charity.  (See  quotations 
farther  on.) 

It  is  taken  as  a real  symbol,  (a)  It  was  His  true  living 
Heart  that  Our  Lord  showed  to  Blessed  Margaret  Mary,  and 
it  was  of  this  Heart  that  He  said : “ Behold  the  Heart  which 
has  loved  so  much.”  Now,  is  not  to  love  with  a true,  living 
heart,  to  produce  affections  or  to  feel  their  impressions? 

(b)  Father  de  Gallifet  and  the  defenders  of  the  cause  ap- 
pealed incessantly  to  the  effective  correspondence  between  the 
heart  and  the  emotions.  Later,  Pius  IX  proclaimed  that  the 
worship  of  the  Sacred  Heart  was  that  of  a heart  burning  with 
love  for  mankind,  of  a heart  which  is  the  seat  of  Divine  Love. 
(See  quotations  farther  on.) 

( c ) If  the  devotion  to  the  Sacred  Heart  be  founded  on  a 
simple  metaphor,  there  is  no  reason  whatever  for  uniting 
one’s  self  to  the  physical,  living  Heart  of  Our  Lord.  The 
enemies  of  the  devotion  understand  this  well,  and  we  have 
refuted  their  claims  above. 

( d ) This  truth,  already  evident,  springs  from  the  difference 
which  the  Acts  of  the  Holy  See  establish  and  maintain  be- 
tween the  worship  of  the  Sacred  Heart  and  that  of  the  Holy 
Face.  While  they  formally  acknowledge  and  approve  the 

(1)  Some  authors  speak  of  a symbolic  heart  as  one  taken  in  a 
■figurative  sense.  Such  language  we  hold  to  be  defective.  A symbolic 
heart  is  any  heart  used  as  a symbol.  Now,  symbolism  belongs  above 
all  to  a real  heart,  but  it  could  pass  thence  to  an  imaginary  heart, 
although  even  the  use  of  the  word  heart  is  not  metaphorical . 


24  The  Heart  of  Christ  as  a Symbol  of  His  Love. 

homage  rendered  the  living  Heart  of  the  Saviour,  they  dis- 
approve the  special  and  direct  homage  paid  to  the  Holy 
Face.(l)  They  admit  that  we  continue  to  venerate  the  an- 
tique picture  of  the  mangled  Face  of  the  Saviour  and  copies 
of  it,  in  order  thereby  to  excite  ourselves  to  a livelier  and 
more  effectual  remembrance  of  Our  Saviour’s  passion.  (2) 
In  the  devotion  to  the  Sacred  Heart  the  image  of  the  heart 
is  not  the  symbol  we  honor;  it  merely  represents  the  true, 
living  Heart  which  Itself  is  the  real  and  natural  symbol  of 
love , and  therefore  receives  our  homage ; in  devotion  to  the 
Holy  Face,  the  picture  does  not  induce  us  to  honor  the  real 
Face  of  Our  Saviour  but  His  passion,  symbolically  expressed 
on  canvas.  While  just  in  its  application  to  the  worship  of 
the  Holy  Face,  this  idea  would  be  false  if  applied  to  the  wor- 
ship of  the  Sacred  Heart,  being  that  held  by  Catholics  tainted 
with  Jansenism.  After  this  example  we  can  better  under- 
stand what  the  purely  symbolic  heart  was,  which,  according 
to  them,  entered  into  the  devotion  to  the  Heart  of  Jesus. 

But  these  proofs  are  superfluous,  and  we  can  unhesitatingly 
formulate  our  new  conclusion:  the  proper  object  of  the  de- 
votion to  the  Sacred  Heart  is  the  heart,  the  real  symbol  of 
Christ's  love;  and,  in  this  object,  the  formal  element  is  the 
quality  of  real  symbol.  In  other  words,  the  heart  is  honored 
because  and  inasmuch  as  it  is  ( identically ) the  real  symbol 
of  the  love  of  Jesus  Christ. 

4.  Important  Corollary.  The  aspect  under  which  we  con- 
sider the  heart  recalls  what  we  are  emphatically  told  elsewhere 

(1)  Decree  of  the  Holy  Office,  May  4-5,  1892.  ( Acta  Sancta  Sedis, 

25,  749.) 

(2)  Some  may  perhaps  wonder  why  the  deep  imprint  of  suffering 
on  the  mangled  Face  of  the  Saviour  would  not  justify  a special  de- 
votion to  that  Face,  as  the  bond  with  love  justifies  a particular  devotion 
to  the  Heart  of  Jesus.  We  note  two  differences.  The  adorable  Face 
of  Jesus  is  not  altogether  expressive  of  sorrow,  and  where  were  once 
the  bleeding  stigmata  is  now  an  effulgence  of  purest  joy.  Hence  the 
real  Face  of  the  Saviour  could  not  be  a symbol  of  suffering  and  the 
suffering  Face  does  not  correspond  to  any  present  reality;  it  exists 
merely  on  the  canvas  on  which  it  was  painted,  and  therefore  the  de- 
votion could  only  be  to  a picture.  On  the  contrary,  the  Heart  of  Jesus 
always  loved,  was  never  anything  but  love,  and  continues  in  perfect 
harmony  with  a love  that  will  never  end. 


The  Heart  of  Christ  as  a Symbol  of  His  Love. 


25 


in  the  revelations  of  Blessed  Margaret  Mary.  We  honor  the 
Heart  of  Christ  the  better  to  honor  His  love,  in  order  to  be 
the  more  deeply  moved  by  this  sensible  representation  which 
the  wound  received  on  the  cross  helps  to  make  more  ex- 
pressive. The  honor  paid  to  that  love  constitutes  the  proxi- 
mate end  of  the  devotion  to  the  Sacred  Heart;  and  if  the  real 
bond  with  the  love  of  Christ  explain  and  justify  it,  inasmuch 
as  the  heart  is  its  point  of  termination,  the  love  itself  explains 
and  justifies  this  same  devotion  inasmuch  as  the  latter  termi- 
nates in  Jesus  Christ,  Who,  as  we  said  in  the  beginning,  is 
its  object  or  primary  end.  * We  especially  honor  Jesus  Christ 
because  He  loves,  and  we  honor  His  Heart  because  It  is  the 
symbol  of  His  love.  Thus,  if  we  would  return  to  the  primary 
end,  love  constitutes  the  formal  object  of  devotion  to  the 
Sacred  Heart,  and  it  was  this  what  Pius  VI  meant  when  he 
said : “ Devotion  to  the  Sacred  Heart  substantially  consists 
in  meditating  upon  and  in  venerating  in  the  symbolic  image 
of  the  heart,  Our  Divine  Redeemer’s  immense  charity  and  the 
effusions  of  His  love.”(l)  And  Father  de  Gallifet  observes: 
“ Even  if  the  nature  of  this  feast  (of  the  Sacred  Heart) 
be  not  very  attentively  considered,  it  will  be  understood  and 
felt  that,  under  the  title  of  the  Heart  of  Jesus,  it  is  in  reality 
the  feast  of  the  love  of  Jesus.” (2)  Then  in  the  Breviary (3) 
we  read  that  “ the  feast  was  granted  in  order  that  under  the 
symbol  of  this  Most  Holy  Heart,  the  faithful  might  celebrate 
the  love  of  Christ  with  more  fervor  and  devotion.” 

However,  we  must  not,  as  several  writers  seem  to  have 
done,  distinguish  as  two  parallel  objects  of  the  devotion  to 
the  Sacred  Heart,  the  one  material  or  sensible,  the  other  for- 
mal or  spiritual ; and  Father  Terrien  very  appropriately  re- 
marks (4)  that  if  there  w^ere  two  separable  objects  there  would 
be  two  devotions  to  the  Sacred  Heart.  On  the  contrary,  the 

(1)  Letter  to  Scipio  Ricci,  Bishop  of  Prato-Pistoia. 

(2)  New  observations  for  the  concession  of  the  Office  and  the  Mass 
of  the  Sacred  Heart.  Observation  II  quoted  by  Father  Nilles,  De 
Rationibus  . . . edit.  5,  vol.  I,  p.  336. 

(3)  Lesson  VI  of  the  Office. 

(4)  La  Devotion  an  Sacre  Cccur  de  Jesus,  chap.  Ill,  p.  34. 


2fi  The  Heart  of  Christ  as  a Symbol  of  His  Love. 

formal  and  the  material  object  of  the  devotion  must  simply 
be  the  two  elements,  one  material  and  the  other  formal,  o£ 
one  and  the  same  object  and  in  the  present  case,  thanks  to 
symbolism,  they  can  be  so.  As  Father  de  Gallifet  says:  “ The 
immediate  object  of  the  feast  is  the  love  which  makes  the 
heart  burn,  the  love  which,  with  the  heart,  forms  an  indi- 
visible whole.”  (1) 

The  heart  and  the  love  are  one  and  the  same  object;  either 
the  heart  is  the  real  symbol  of  love,  or  love  is  symbolized  by 
the  heart.  “ Note,  then,”  says  Father  J.  B.  Terrien,  “ the 
proper  object  of  the  devotion  to  the  Sacred  Heart:  it  is  neither 
the  Heart  of  flesh  to  the  exclusion  of  the  love,  nor  the  love 
to  the  exclusion  of  the  Heart,  but  Heart  and  love  combined. 
Whosoever  says  ‘ Heart  of  Jesus  ’ says  both  of  these  things, 
or,  rather,  but  one  thing  composed,  so  to  speak,  of  two  in- 
separable elements  joined  in  the  unity  of  one  object,  as  the 
body  and  soul  are  combined  in  the  substantial  unity  of  one 
and  the  same  nature.  I adore  the  material  Heart  of  Jesus, 
but  in  adoring  It  I consider  It  the  living  symbol  which  per- 
sonifies for  me  all  His  love;  I adore  the  Love  of  Jesus,  but 
in  adoring  It  I contemplate  It  in  the  natural  and  sensible 
manifestation  in  which  Jesus  shows  It  to  me  in  His  Heart  of 
Flesh.  Love  is  certainly  the  principal  element,  as  the  acts 
which  go  to  make  up  this  devotion  do  not  descend  from  love 
to  the  heart,  but  rise  from  the  heart  to  love.  However,  the 
physical  Heart  is  the  sacred  auxiliary  element  which  puts  that 
love  within  the  range  of  my  weakness : as  it  is  through  the 
heart  that  it  is  revealed  to  me,  that  it  touches  me  and  that  I 
attain  to  it.” (2) 

These  considerations  contain  at  the  same  time  the  answer 
to  this  interesting  question : Is  the  worship  of  the  physical 
Heart  of  Our  Lord  essential  to  the  devotion  to  the  Sacred 
Heart?  The  question  is  practical  only  insofar  as  it  deals  with 

(1)  In  the  apology  offered  Benedict  XIII,  book  II,  chap.  2,  quoted  by 
Nilles,  De  Rationibus  . . . edit.  5,  vol.  I,  p.  340. 

(2)  La  Devotion  au  Sacre  Coeur  de  Jesus,  chap.  IV,  p.  37.  We 
quote  this  author  all  the  more  willingly  now,  as  later  on  we  shall  have 
to  contradict  him. 


The  Heart  of  Christ  as  a Symbol  of  His  Love. 


27 


private  devotion.  In  public  worship  it  is  of  paramount  neces- 
sity to  present  the  devotion  to  the  Sacred  Heart  such  as  it 
was  made  known  by  Blessed  Margaret  Mary  and  has  been 
approved  by  the  Church,  and  the  real,  living  Heart  is  an  in- 
dispensable element  of  it.  To  take  It  away  would  be  to  ad- 
vance the  cause  of  the  enemies  of  the  devotion,  to  render  it 
less  accessible  to  all  under  pretext  of  spiritualizing  it ; in  fact, 
it  would  be  almost  like  replacing  Jesus  Christ  by  His  Soul. 

If,  even  in  private,  we  were  to  conceive  a most  commendable 
worship  with  Our  Lord's  love  as  its  exclusive  object,  such  a 
worship  would  not  be  of  the  Sacred  Heart.  It  would,  of 
course,  retain  the  principal  element  of  it  and  thereby  resemble 
it,  but  the  material  element  would  be  lacking.  In  the  same 
way  every  devotion  to  the  sufferings  of  Our  Lord  is  not  neces- 
sarily that  of  the  Five  Wounds  which  symbolize  these  suffer- 
ings. Of  course,  the  representation  of  the  physical  heart  will 
be  more  or  less  vivid  in  proportion  to  one's  temperament  and 
inclinations,  but  surely  there  is  none  who  considers  himself 
so  far  above  the  common  conditions  of  humanity  as  to  think 
that  he  does  not  require  the  help  of  symbols,  above  all  of  those 
which  the  Divine  Goodness  providentially  metes  out  to  our 
present  weakness. 


CHAPTER  V. 

The  Love  of  Which  the  Heart  of  Jesus  is  the  Symbol. 

It  was  for  a purpose  that,  in  the  preceding  section,  we  spoke 
of  Christ’s  love  without  defining  it,  and  the  reader  may  have 
discovered  a hiatus.  Indeed,  perhaps  more  than  once  he  has 
wondered  to  what  particular  love  we  referred : whether  it  was 
the  love  of  Christ  for  mankind,  the  love  which  He  feels  in 
His  two  natures,  or  only  that  emanating  from  His  human 
nature.  Now,  by  clearing  up  this  doubt,  we  shall  settle  the 
question  we  had  in  view  when  undertaking  this  work  and  the 
importance  of  which  cannot  be  denied.  For  the  sake  of  clear- 
ness we  will  divide  this  section  into  several  paragraphs. 


28 


Created  or  Uncreated  Love. 


1.  The  Mystery  of  the  Incarnation.  Created  and  Uncreated 

Love.  The  Question  Considered  from  This  Point  of  View. 

This  first  paragraph  connects  the  question  with  the  most 
consoling  mystery  of  our  faith,  the  mystery  of  the  Incarnate 
Word.  We  must  scrupulously  preserve  the  Catholic  concep- 
tion of  it  and,  consequently,  not  depart  even  in  our  mode  of 
expression  from  usages  accepted  by  the  Church.  And  now 
we  shall  reflect  for  a moment  upon  the  principal  points  of 
the  dogma  of  the  Word  made  Flesh. 

Decided  upon  and  executed  by  the  entire  Trinity,  attributed 
to  the  Holy  Ghost,  inasmuch  as  it  is  a supreme  favor  of  Divine 
love,(l)  the  work  of  the  Incarnation  gave  human  nature  to 
only  the  Second  Person  of  the  Blessed  Trinity,  the  Word  of 
God  called  since  the  Incarnation,  Jesus  Christ.  During  the 
course  of  centuries  a more  exact  concept  of  this  dogma  of 
love  was  formed  because  of  the  necessity  of  refuting  opposing 
heresies,  but  we  shall  restrict  our  references  to  the  principal 
among  them.  Nestorius  (439)  destroyed  theandric  union  by 
distinguishing  two  personalities  in  Christ:  the  human  per- 
sonality, born  of  the  Virgin  Mary  and  the  personality  of  the 
Word,  begotten  of  the  Father  from  all  eternity.  Thanks  to  a 
union,  which  was  begun  at  the  conception  of  the  Son  of  Mary 
and  which  was  to  receive  from  the  subsequent  merits  of  the 
human  person  thus  deified  its  confirmation  and  achievement, 
these  two  persons  were,  according  to  Nestorius,  inseparably 
united,  even  to  forming  a single  moral  person  and  to  making 
the  human  person  participate  in  honors  peculiar  to  the  Eter- 
nal Word.  Despite  a certain  excellence,  this  union  savored 
of  the  nature  of  momentary  communications  with  which  the 
Divinity  honored  the  prophets. (2)  By  a contrary  tendency, 
the  Monophysite  sects,  following  the  monk  Eutyches  (454), 
concluded  or  inferred  from  the  unity  of  person  a unity  of 
compound  nature,  which,  from  the  time  of  the  Incarnation 

(1)  Saint  Thomas’s  Summa  theologica,  part  III,  q.  XXXII,  a.  1. 

(2)  See  Franzelin,  De  Verbo  incarnato,  edit.  2,  th.  22,  especially  at 
the  end,  p.  182. 


Created  or  Uncreated  Love.  2** 

of  the  Word,  constituted  the  divine  and  the  human  nature.  (1) 
This  heresy,  anathematized  by  the  Council  of  Chalcedon, 
which  took  place  twenty  years  after  that  of  Ephesus  (431),  at 
which  Nestorius  was  condemned,  reappeared  under  a new 
form  with  the  Monothelites.  While  admitting  two  essential 
natures  in  the  Word,  these  heretics  did  not  understand  how 
human  nature  could  be  for  Christ  what  it  is  for  us,  the  prin- 
ciple of  a whole  order  of  activity.  According  to  them,  Christ 
had  in  His  divine  nature  the  immediate  principle  of  all  action, 
of  all  submission ; whereas,  in  operating  and  in  suffering,  He 
made  use  of  His  human  nature  as  of  an  inert  instrument 
destitute  of  will  and  energy. (2)  In  confronting  these  errors 
the  Church  shows  herself  equally  jealous  of  preserving  the 
unity  of  person  and  the  distinction  of  two  natures : the  divine 
nature  common  with  all  its  perfections  and  all  its  tendencies 
to  the  Father,  the  Son  and  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  the  human 
nature,  body  and  soul  complete,  peculiar,  with  all  its  opera- 
tions and  tendencies,  to  the  Incarnate  Word.  In  other  words, 
the  substantial  union  of  the  human  nature  with  God  was  not 
made  in  the  divine  nature  but  in  the  Second  Person  of  the 
Blessed  Trinity,  the  person  identified  with  that  nature.  How 
the  union  could  be  accomplished  in  the  person,  without  being 
accomplished  in  a nature  identical  with  that  person,  is  a mys- 
tery deep  as  the  unfathomable  abyss  of  the  mystery  of  the 
Blessed  Trinity.  However,  we  know  and  we  profess  that 
the  personal  union  excludes  all  absorption  of  one  nature  by 
the  other,  as  also  all  confusion,  all  commingling  of  the  divine 
and  human  natures,  for  from  that  would  result  a third  nature 
composed  of  the  two  preceding  ones. 

Hence,  in  Jesus  Christ  there  are  two  natures,  two  wills, 
combining  harmoniously  and  subordinate  one  to  the  other, 
but  physically  and  essentially  distinct,  and  of  which  the  dis- 
tinction as  well  as  the  reality  must  be  maintained.  Now.  ad- 
mitted that  there  are  two  wills,  there  must  also  be  two  loves. 
In  Christ  there  is  eternal,  uncreated  love  identified  with  the 


(1)  Ibid.,  th.  21,  p.  172. 

(2)  Ibid.,  th.  40,  p.  387. 


30 


Created  or  Uncreated  Love. 


Father,  the  Word  and  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  a created  love, 
human  and  sanctified,  whereby  Christ  loves  His  Father  and 
also  loves  us. 

Therefore,  naturally  enough,  the  question  arises:  Since  by 
the  worship  of  the  Sacred  Heart,  we  especially  honor  the 
love  of  Jesus  Christ,  which  love  is  it?  The  love  that  created 
the  universe  or  the  most  sublime  of  all  created  loves?  The 
love  that  created  Lazarus  or  the  love  that  wept  over  him? 

In  other  words,  as  Father  Nilles(l)  expresses  it:  the  object 
of  the  devotion  to  the  Sacred  Heart  is  not  a metaphorical 
heart,  nor  indeed  the  real  heart  taken  in  itself  absolutely,  but 
the  heart,  as  a real  symbol  of  love.  Now,  of  what  love  is  it  the 
symbol  in  the  worship  of  the  Sacred  Heart? 

We  must  remember  that  the  love  which  Christ  bears  us  in 
His  human  nature  is  not  a purely  human  love;  it  is  divine 
in  consideration  of  the  person ; it  is  the  love  of  a God,  and 
therefore  its  dignity  and  value  are  infinite.  We  should  call 
it  theandric  rather  than  human,  as  it  is  the  love  of  a God  in 
the  human  nature  assumed  by  Him. 

But  we  mean  to  return  to  these  ideas  and  dwell  upon  them 
at  greater  length.  First,  in  order  the  better  to  rid  ourselves 
of  all  preconceived  notions  and  dispose  ourselves  to  make  an 
impartial  examination,  we  shall  review  the  opinions  set  forth 
by  different  authors  or  reflected  in  the  decisions  of  the  Holy 
See.  Readers  already  convinced  that  the  difference  of  opin- 
ions on  this  question  gives  us  entire  freedom  of  thought,  and 
that  the  ambiguity  and  confusion  of  views  render  an  exact 
and  methodical  exposition  most  desirable,  may  pass  over  this 
paragraph  and  without  further  delay  delve  into  the  very 
depths  of  the  subject. 

2.  Authors?  Opinions. 

Preliminary  observations.  Two  remarks  will  enable  us  the 
better  to  understand  the  ideas  of  these  authors. 

1.  If  we  attribute  to  the  love  of  Christ  characteristics  all  of 
which  are  suited  to  His  created  love  (such  is  even  the  qualifi- 


(1)  Cor  Jesu  ut  caritatis  symbolum,  p.  9-25. 


Preliminary  Observations. 


31 


cation  “ divine  ” given  to  His  love)  we  equivalently  and  tacit- 
ly exclude  uncreated  love.  In  fact,  (a)  the  love  of  a human 
heart  is  itself  considered  human  unless  the  contrary  be  said 
of  it:  ( b ) if  uncreated  charity  be  assigned  a place,  it  should 
be  in  the  first  rank.  That  we  should  be  satisfied  with  presup- 
posing what  is  evidently  the  principal  element  is  past  belief. 

2.  The  love  of  Christ  to  which  we  owe  the  Passion  and 
the  Eucharist  must  be  the  love  He  bears  us  in  His  human 
nature,  (a)  It  was  as  man  that  Christ  died  for  us;  it  was 
in  consequence  of  an  excellence  peculiar  to  human  nature  that 
He  instituted  the  Sacraments  and  accordingly  the  Blessed 
Eucharist.  (1)  It  is  only  by  divine  power  that  the  Sacra- 
ments operate  the  interior  effect  of  sanctification;  but  this 
power  and  this  operation,  though  common  to  the  Blessed 
Trinity,  are  attributed  to  the  Holy  Ghost;  it  would  not,  there- 
fore, be  very  theological  to  ascribe  them  to  the  love  of  Christ. 
( b ) Moreover,  by  way  of  confirmation,  we  can  invoke  the 
argument  of  authority.  Lesson  VI  of  the  Office  recognizes 
in  the  Sacred  Heart  the  symbol  of  the  love  of  Christ  suffer- 
ing and  instituting  'the  Holy  Eucharist.  Marques (2)  con- 
cludes that  here  there  is  only  question  of  created  love.  Father 
de  San  says  that,  properly  speaking,  the  Heart  of  Jesus  sym- 
bolizes created  love,  especially  that  which  gave  us  the  Passion 
and  the  Eucharist. (3)  Father  Nilles  expresses  himself  still 
more  explicitly : (4)  “ Just  as  Christ  as  man  suffered  for  us, 

and  as  such  renews  in  the  Eucharist  the  memory  of  His  Pas- 
sion, so  the  Passion  and  the  Eucharist  are  the  principal  dem- 
onstrations of  the  love  He  bears  us  in  His  human  nature  ” 
Among  those  operations  which,  in  the  humanity  of  Christ,  are 
worthy  of  adoration,  Cardinal  Franzelin  ranks  the  love  to 
which  the  Church  is  indebted  for  the  spiritual  nourishment 
of  the  Sacraments. (5) 

Here,  then,  are  different  opinions  on  the  subject  we  are 

(1)  Saint  Thomas’s  Summa  theologica,  part  III,  q.  XLIV,  a.  3. 

(2)  Defensio  cultus,  p.  2,  n.  18. 

(3)  De  Verbo  incarnato , c.  21. 

(4)  Cor  Jesu  divini  Redemptoris  nostri  caritatis  symbolum,  p.  26. 

(5)  De  Verbo  incarnato , p.  467. 


32 


Authors’  Opinions. 


discussing,  gathered  from  among  authorized  representatives 
of  the  devotion  to  the  Sacred  Heart  or  of  theological  science : 

1.  In  the  annals  of  the  devotion  to  the  Sacred  Heart,  the 

first  name  to  be  inscribed  after  that  of  Blessed  Margaret  Mary 
is  that  of  the  spiritual  guide  sent  her  by  God  to  acknowledge 
the  divine  and  supernatural  origin  of  the  revelations  concern- 
ing the  Sacred  Heart.  The  venerable  Father  de  La  Colom- 
biere,  S .J.,  considers  the  Divine  Heart  the  “ seat  of  all  virtues, 
the  source  of  all  blessings  and  the  refuge  of  all  holy  souls.” 
He  says  that  the  principal  virtues  to  be  honored  in  that  Heart 
are  Its  respectful,  humble  love  for  God  the  Father,  Its  pa- 
tience with  and  grief  for  our  sins,  Its  sensible  compassion  for 
our  misery,  Its  immense  love  despite  this  same  misery,  and 
Its  absolute  equanimity  caused  by  perfect  conformity  with 
the  divine  will.  “ The  sentiments  of  this  Heart  are  still  the 
same.  . . . For  all  that,  It  finds  in  the  hearts  of  men 

only  unkindness,  forgetfulness,  contempt,  ingratitude ; It  loves, 
but  is  not  loved  in  return.  ...  In  reparation  for  so  many 
insults  ” the  holy  religious  consecrates  his  own  heart  and 
abandons  himself  entirely  to  It.  ( 1 ) We  do  not  think  that 
Father  de  La  Colombiere  expresses  himself  anywhere  more 
clearly  upon  the  devotion  to  the  Sacred  Heart  of  Jesus.  Now, 
judged  according  to  these  expressions,  not  only  does  the  Heart 
Itself  belong  to  the  humanity,  but  all  the  sentiments  acknowl- 
edged and  honored  therein  are  divine  sentiments  which  Our 
Lord  feels  in  His  human  nature. 

2.  At  the  earnest  solicitation  of  Blessed  Margaret  Mary, 
Father  J.  Croiset,  S.J.,  explained  the  devotion  to  the  Sacred 
Heart  in  a book,  of  which  she  said:(2)  “ If  I mistake  not, (3) 
it  is  all  so  perfectly  in  accord  with  His  (Our  Lord’s)  desire, 
that  I do  not  think  any  of  it  needs  to  be  changed.” 

Without  making  a formal  statement  to  that  effect.  Father 
Croiset  shows  most  unmistakably  that  he  considers  only  the 

(1)  Spiritual  Retreat,  Offering  to  the  Sacred  Heart  at  the  end. 

(2)  Letter  to  Father  Croiset,  Aug.  21,  1690. 

(3)  We  know  that  Blessed  Margaret  Mary  was  under  obedience 
thus  to  temper  her  expressions. 


Authors'  Opinions. 


33 


Saviour’s  human  heart  and  created  love  the  special  object  of 
devotion  to  the  Sacred  Heart.  He  attributes  the  excellence  of 
the  adorable  Heart  of  Jesus  to  Its  union  with  the  Divine 
Person  and  to  the  virtues  with  which  the  Heart  is  adorned ;(1) 
and  the  benefits  to  which  he  refers  in  paragraph  3 of  chapter 
III  are  those  of  the  Redemption  and  the  institution  of  the 
Blessed  Eucharist.  In  the  following  words  he  sums  up  the 
economy  of  Christ’s  love : “ God  has  rendered  Himself  more 
sensible,  so  to  speak,  by  becoming  man,  and  this  same  man 
has  done  even  what  is  beyond  our  power  of  conception,  in 
order  to  make  men  love  Him.  . . . Such,  then,  are  the 

effects  of  the  love  of  Jesus  for  us.”  Finally,  the  first  lines 
of  the  work  thus  define  the  particular  object  of  the  devotion : 
“ It  was  the  immense  love  of  the  Son  of  God  which  led  Him 
to  deliver  Himself  up  to  death  for  us  and  to  give  Himself 
entirely  to  us  in  the  Most  Holy  Sacrament  of  the  Altar,  and 
even  the  sight  of  all  the  ingratitude  and  all  the  insults  which 
He  was  to  receive  as  a Victim  immolated  to  the  end  of  time 
did  not  deter  Him  from  working  this  miracle.” (2) 

3.  Father  Froment,  S.J.,  the  contemporary  of  Father 
Croiset,  composed  at  the  same  time  as  the  latter  a treatise  on 
The  True  Devotion  to  the  Sacred  Heart  of  Jesus.  Only  the 
date  of  its  appearance  induces  us  to  quote  from  a work  which 
met  with  scarcely  any  success.  Father  Sommervogel(3) 
mentions  but  one  edition  of  it.  and  the  treatise,  fallen  into 
oblivion,  had  become  very  rare,  when  it  was  reprinted  in  the 
Petite  Bibliothcquc  chretienne.(4i)  From  the  beginning,  the 
author  considers  the  Heart  of  Jesus  in  its  very  broadest  ac- 

(1)  Part  I,  chap.  Ill,  sec.  1. 

(2)  We  quote  the  edition  of  Father  de  Franciosi,  Montreuil,  1895. 
The  omission  of  certain  formalities  caused  Father  Croiset’s  book  to 
be  put  on  the  Index,  March  11,  1704.  It  was  withdrawn  August  24,  1887, 
thanks  to  the  urgent  measures  taken  by  Mgr.  Stadler,  Archbishop  of 
Vrhbosine.  At  the  head  of  his  edition  Father  de  Franciosi  inserted 
a dedicatory  epistle  in  which  these  measures  are  brought  to  light. 

(3)  Bibliothcquc  dcs  ccrivains  de  la  Compagnie  de  Jesus. 

(4)  Brussels,  Vromant,  1891.  The  simultaneous  composition  of  the 
treatises  of  Fathers  Froment  and  Croiset  was  the  occasion  of  some 
embarrassmment  to  Blessed  Margaret  Mary,  as  may  be  seen  from  her 
letter  of  February  18,  1690,  to  Father  Croiset,  quoted  by  Letierce  in 
Etude  sur  le  Sacre  Cceur,  vol.  II,  p.  27. 


34 


Authors'  Opinions. 


ceptation : “ The  Heart  of  Jesus  may  be  regarded  in  different 
ways,  namely,  not  merely  as  the  Heart  of  Flesh , which  con- 
stitutes a part  of  the  adorable  Body  of  the  Son  of  God,  but 
also  as  the  will,  divine  as  well  as  human,  of  this  God-Man, 
which  will  has  always  loved  us  with  an  ardent  love;  and  lastly, 
as  this  same  love.  In  all  these  different  ways  the  Heart  of 
Jesus  is  considered  throughout  this  w’ork,  which  is  to  say 
that  It  is  looked  upon  as  the  seat  of  that  excessive  love  which 
led  Him  to  deliver  Himself  unto  death  for  us  and  to  give  Him- 
self to  us  till  the  end  of  time  in  the  Blessed  Sacrament,  the 
masterpiece  of  His  Divine  Heart  and  the  consummation  of 
His  love  for  men  who  treat  Him  with  naught  save  coldness 
and  indifference/’  These  lines  seem  to  us  somewhat  con- 
fused,  and  in  his  development  the  author  is  losing  sight  of 
uncreated  love. 

4.  Perhaps  no  one  worked  more  efficaciously  for  the  appro- 
bation of  the  public  worship  of  the  Sacred  Heart  than  the  cele- 
brated Father  de  Gallifet,  S.J.,  a disciple  of  Father  de  La 
Colombiere,  and  restored  to  health  after  a vow  made  by 
Father  Croiset.  The  entreaties  which  finally  won  the  ap- 
proval of  the  Holy  See  either  came  from  him  or  were  inspired 
by  his  writings,  and  his  work  on  The  Excellence  of  the  Devo- 
tion to  the  Sacred  Heart  was  soon  “ considered  the  manual 
par  excellence  of  the  devotion.”  ( 1)  Few  authorities  can  be 
compared  with  him.  Now,  from  his  book  and  his  defense  it 
appears  clearly  that  he  considers  the  created  love  of  Christ 
the  special  (spiritual)  (2)  object  of  the  devotion  to  the  Sacred 
Heart.  He  explains  the  entire  worship  of  the  Sacred  Heart 
by  the  hypostatic  union  of  the  Heart  of  Jesus  with  the  Person 
of  the  Word  and  a love  of  which  this  Heart  must  have  felt 
the  impressions.  “ As  the  love,”  he  says,  “ with  which  the 
Lord  Jesus  as  man  has  loved  God  the  Father  and  men  them- 
selves, was  conceived  according  to  the  manner  peculiar  to 
human  nature,  it  follows  that  to  the  intense  spiritual  love  of 

(1)  Letierce,  op.  cit.,  p.  153. 

(2)  In  fact  he  distinguishes  between  a sensible  object , the  heart  and  a 
spiritual  object  formed  by  love. 


Authors'  Opinions. 


35 


the  Soul  of  Christ,  there  should  be  a corresponding  sensible, 
proportionate  love  in  the  Heart/’  (1)  He  then  exalts  the 
Heart  of  Jesus  by  beholding  in  It  a noble  part  of  the  body ; 
he  observes  the  relations  of  that  Heart  with  the  affections 
of  the  soul,  Its  union  with  the  Divine  Person,  the  love  with 
which  It  burns  for  God,  the  sanctity  of  the  Word,  in  which 
It  participates,  the  gifts  which  the  Holy  Ghost  has  bestowed 
upon  It,  and  the  glory  that  It  gives  to  God.  And  as  regards 
man,  he  adds,  this  Heart  is  that  of  their  Redeemer. (2) 

5.  Cardinal  Gerdil(3)  frequently  repeats  that  the  Heart 
of  Jesus  Christ  is  taken  as  the  symbol  of  Christ’s  immense 
love , but  he  does  not  state  whether  this  love  is  created  or  un- 
created. His  silence  leads  us  to  believe  that  he  thought  only 
of  the  sentiments  of  human  nature,  the  more  so,  as  he  gives 
for  a reason,  in  favor  of  the  worship,  that  Christ  Himself 
sanctioned  our  attributing  to  the  heart  the  affections  and 
sentiments  of  the  soul. 

6.  Benoit  Tetamo,  S.J.,  wrote  his  Dissertation  apologetiqne 
sur  le  culte  dn  Sacre  Ccenr  in  1772.  In  the  Appendix  I,  chap- 
ter 1,  he  acknowledges  that  the  Heart  of  Jesus  symbolizes  both 
uncreated  and  created  love.  A decree  of  the  Sacred  Congre- 
gation of  Rites,  in  1765,  to  which  we  will  refer  later,  would 
seem  to  have  inspired  his  opinion.  At  the  close  of  chapter  2, 
he  declares  that  it  would  be  no  more  difficult  for  a heart  of 
flesh  to  symbolize  uncreated  love  than  for  the  word  heart  to 
express  the  love  of  God. 

7.  A little  later,  in  1781,  Emmanuel  Marques,  a member 
of  the  suppressed  Society,  published  his  celebrated  work, 
Defensio  cultus  Sacratissimi  Cordis  Jesn.( 4)  He  deals  very 
explicitly  with  the  question  that  interests  us,  and  here  is  the 
gist  of  his  reply,  (a)  The  worship  and  the  feast  of  the  Sacred 

(1)  De  cultu  . . . , book  I,  chap.  1. 

(2)  Ibid.,  book  II.  chap.  I.  It  is  as  man  and  not  in  His  divine 
nature  that  Christ  is  Mediator  and  Redeemer.  St.  Paul’s  First  Epistle 
to  Timothy,  II,  5.  See  Franzelin’s  De  Verbo  incarnato,  th.  46,  p.  497. 

(3)  Animadversiones  in  notas  Cl.  Feller  de  nonnullis  propositionibus 
damnatis  Pistoriensis  synodi.  Animadversio  2;  et  nota  ex  animadvcr- 
sione.  Opera,  vol.  XIV,  pp.  348  and  374.  Romae,  1809. 

(4)  Defensio  cultus  SS.  Cordis  Jesu,  pars.  2,  propositio  la,  n.  15-19. 


36 


Authors'  Opinions. 


Heart  formally  refer  to  Christ’s  love  of  mankind,  not  to  His 
love  of  God.  ( b ) This  love  is,  strictly  speaking,  created  love, 
especially  that  which  the  Saviour  manifested  for  us  in  His 
Passion  and  in  the  Eucharist.  In  reality  the  Heart  of  Jesus 
has  not  the  affinity  and  analogy  with  uncreated  love  upon 
which  its  symbolism  is  founded,  and  in  the  Office  of  the  feast, 
the  Church  expressly  declares  that  the  love  of  our  suffering 
Saviour  is  honored  by  renewing  in  the  Holy  Eucharist  the 
memory  of  His  death.  The  prayer  of  the  feast  recalls  the 
same  benefits.  Indeed  the  entire  Office,  as  is  shown  by  the 
responses  after  the  lessons,  is  divided  between  these  two  mys- 
teries of  love,  (c)  However,  the  admirable  conformity  of  the 
human  will  of  Christ  with  the  divine  will  reveals  to  us  in  the 
created  love  of  Christ  a perfect  imitation  of  the  uncreated 
love.  Consequently  the  symbol  of  the  one  becomes,  in  a meas- 
ure, the  symbol  of  the  other;  and  uncreated  love  may  be  un- 
derstood in  a broad  sense  in  the  worship  of  the  Sacred  Heart. 
In  support  of  this  opinion  Marques  refers  to  the  decree  of 
1765,  from  which  we  have  already  quoted,  and  which  reads 
thus : “ By  the  celebration  of  the  Office  and  of  the  Mass,  we 
symbolically  renew  the  memory  of  this  divine  love  by  which 
the  only  Son  of  God  assumed  human  nature.”  “ Behold,” 
says  Marques,  “ uncreated  love.”  The  decree  adds : “ And 
(through  love)  becoming  obedient  even  unto  death,  (the  Son 
of  God)  declared  that  He  gave  Himself  to  men  as  an  example 
of  meekness  and  humility  of  heart.”  “ Behold,”  resumes  Mar- 
ques, “ created  love.” 

8.  According  to  the  celebrated  Frangois-Antoine  Zaccaria, 
S.J.,  the  worship  of  the  Sacred  Heart  is  indeed  that  of  the 
humanity  of  the  Word ; the  Heart  of  Christ  does  not  in  any 
way  participate  in  uncreated  love,  but  only  in  created  love, 
and  the  object  of  the  feast  could  not  be  a purely  symbolical 
heart ; it  is  the  real  Heart  of  the  Saviour,  united  to  the  hu- 
manity and  to  the  Person  of  the  Word  and  symbol  of  love.(l) 

(l)  Antidoto  contra  i libri  prodotti  o da  prodursi  dal  sign.  Blasi 
intorno  alia  divozione  al  S.  Cuore  di  Gesu.,  p.  20,  21,  33,  61  et  n. 
16,  p.  108.  Florence,  1773. 


Authors'  Opinions. 


37 


Therefore,  Zaccaria  seems  to  limit  the  special  object  of  the 
devotion  to  the  Sacred  Heart  to  created  love. 

9.  The  works  of  the  learned  and  pious  Muzzarelli  (1768- 
1813)  always  bear  the  stamp  of  rich  erudition  and  unques- 
tionable orthodoxy,  but  it  does  not  seem  to  us  that  his  disserta- 
tion on  the  rules  for  speaking  and  writing  with  precision  on 
the  devotion  and  worship  due  to  the  Sacred  Heart  furnish  the 
clear  and  accurate  ideas  which  it  was  his  intention  to  convey, 
and  which  his  talent  would  have  led  us  to  expect.  Deviating 
from  the  ordinary  (1)  language  which  he  thinks  he  uses,  Muz- 
zarelli makes  Jesus  Christ  Himself  the  material,  real  and 
proper  object  of  the  feast  and  of  the  devotion  to  the  Sacred 
Heart.  The  heart  is  the  formal  object,  that  which  gives  rise 
to  the  worship.  The  heart  can  be  taken  either  in  the  proper 
sense,  namely,  as  the  heart  of  flesh,  the  victim  of  love,  in  which 
event  it  cannot  receive  appellations  of  a divine  nature, (2) 
or  in  a symbolical  or  metaphorical (3)  sense,  which  may  be 
applied  to  the  created  or  uncreated  will,  to  created  or  un- 
created love.  The  Church  has  varied  her  expressions,  thereby 
proving  her  intention  to  associate  the  two  concepts.  It  is  in 
the  formula  inserted  in  the  preface  that  Muzzarelli  expresses 
himself  the  most  clearly.  “ The  material,  proper,  immediate 
and  direct  object  of  the  feast  of  the  Sacred  Heart  of  Jesus  is 
Jesus  Christ  Himself,  and  this  feast  is  occasioned  or  given 
rise  to  by  the  memory  of  His  immense  love  represented  under 
the  symbol  of  His  Sacred  Heart  or  the  Heart  a victim  of  love.” 

10.  Without  formally  discussing  the  question,  Father 
Roothaan  transmits  his  ideas  on  the  worship  of  the  Sacred 
Heart  of  Jesus  in  a letter  addressed  to  the  Society  of  which 
he  was  the  Father  General.  In  this  worship,  he  says,  the 
faithful  celebrate  the  benefits  conferred  by  a loving  Saviour, 
namely,  His  Passion,  death  and  the  institution  of  the  Holy 

(1)  Fr.  Letierce  acknowledges  it,  op.  cit.,  vol.  II,  p.  440  note. 

(2)  He  acknowledges,  however  (p.  16),  that  the  expression,  “The 
Heart  of  Jesus  has  loved  us  with  an  infinite  love,”  may  mean  His 
created  love  which  is  of  infinite  dignity. — We  quote  from  the  French, 
Avignon  edition  1826,  because  we  have  not  the  Italian  edition  at  hand. 

(3)  We  will  continue  to  insist  that  these  two  expressions  are  not 
synonymous.  (See  above,  section  IV.) 


38 


Authors'  Opinions. 


Eucharist,  and  take  upon  themselves  reparation  for  the  insults 
of  which  He  is  the  object,  principally  in  this  mystery  of  love. 
The  love  of  the  Sacred  Heart  is  that  “ which  led  Jesus  Christ 
to  sacrifice  Himself  during  His  entire  life,  even  from  His 
conception,  especially  in  His  Passion  and  death  and  in  the 
Holy  Eucharist,  where  He  continues  to  be  our  Victim. ”(1) 

11.  Father  Gautrelet,  S.J.,  having  clearly  stated  that  the 
Heart  of  Our  Lord  represents  and  completely  embodies  His 
sacred  humanity,  seems  reasonably  to  conclude  from  the  hypo- 
static union  of  the  Heart  with  the  Person,  that  we  find  therein 
Jesus  Christ  entire,  and  hence  also  the  love  of  the  divine  na- 
ture. He,  however,  specifies  nothing  more. (2) 

12.  Whoever  reads  attentively  the  pages  which  the  learned 
C.  Franzelin,  S.J.,  in  his  treatise  De  Verbo  incarnato,(3 ) 
devotes  to  the  adoration  of  the  humanity  of  Christ  and  espe- 
cially of  His  Sacred  Heart,  will  be  readily  convinced  that,  ac- 
cording to  this  author,  the  special  object  of  worship  is  the 
love  of  Christ  in  His  human  nature.  Not  only  is  there  not  a 
word  to  indicate  that  the  Heart  of  Our  Lord  is  also  the  symbol 
of  a love  adorable  in  itself  and  by  itself,  but  moreover, (4) 
(a)  he  likens  the  worship  of  the  Sacred  Heart  to  the  worship 
of  the  mysteries  of  the  Incarnate  Word : “ In  all  these  mys- 
teries the  complete  object  of  worship  is  the  Word,  acting  and 
suffering  in  His  humanity.”  ( b ) He  draws  a parallel  between 
the  worship  of  the  Sacred  Heart  and  that  of  the  Five  Wounds, 
the  latter  worship  corresponding,  as  it  were,  to  the  exterior 
life  and  passion  of  the  Incarnate  Word  and  the  former  to  His 
interior  life  and  passion.  ( c ) The  heart  is  considered  as  mani- 
festing the  theandric  affections  and  as  the  symbol  of  the  love 
and  of  all  the  interior  life  of  the  Redeemer,  the  God-Man. 
Now,  it  is  in  His  human  nature  that  Our  Lord  is  Restorer 
and  Redeemer. 

13.  Father  de  San,  in  his  manuscript (5)  treatise,  and  Father 

(1)  Litterce  de  cultu  SS.  Cordis  Jesu,  pp.  8,  13.  Anvers,  1848. 

(2)  Manuel  de  la  devotion  au  Sacre  Cceur,  art.  2. 

(3)  We  quote  from  the  second  edition,  Rome,  1874. 

(4)  P.  468,  III.— 5 P.  461. 

(5)  De  Verbo  incarnato , chap.  XXI. 


Authors'  Opinions. 


39 


Nilles(l)  adopt  the  opinion  of  Marques.  In  a strict  sense  the 
Heart  of  Jesus  symbolizes  only  created  love;  in  a broader 
sense  it  symbolizes  uncreated  love  also.  Father  Nix,  in  his 
Cultus  SS.  Cordis  Jesn,  does  not  differ  notably  from  these 
other  authors  when  he  makes  created  love  the  proximate  and 
immediate  object  of  worship  and  uncreated  love  its  ultimate 
object.  (2) 

14.  In  his  great  work  De  SS.  Corde  Jesu,  ejusque  cultu, 
Canon  Leroy  makes  the  divine  and  the  human  love  of  Christ 
the  object  of  the  worship  of  the  Sacred  Heart. (3) 

15.  Father  Bucceroni,  S.J.,  in  his  Commentarii  in  cultum 
SS.  Cordis  Jesu , agrees  with  Muzzarelli.  He,  too,  distin- 
guishes between  the  heart  taken  in  the  proper  and  the  meta- 
phorical sense,  and  as  it  may  symbolize  both  created  and  un- 
created love,  it  is  therefore  the  formal  object  of  the  devotion 
to  the  Sacred  Heart.  (4) 

16.  In  his  beautiful  work,  The  Devotion  to  the  Heart  of 
Jesus, (5)  Father  Bernard  Dalgairns,  the  English  Oratorian, 
alludes  merely  to  created  love. 

17.  According  to  Father  Chevalier,  founder  of  the  Mission- 
aries of  the  Sacred  Heart,  and  several  late  writers,  the  scope 
of  the  devotion  is  indefinitely  extended.  They  behold  the 
Heart  of  Jesus  in  the  Word  by  Whom  all  things  were  made; 
and  the  foundation  of  the  devotion  must  therefore  have  been 
co-incident  with  the  creation  of  the  world. (6) 

18.  “ In  the  Incarnate  Word/’  says  Father  Billot,  “ the 
Heart  is  at  once  the  symbol  of  uncreated  love  which  caused 
the  Word  to  descend  upon  earth,  and  of  created  love  which, 
bursting  forth  from  the  first  instant,  led  Him  even  unto  the 
cross.”  (7) 

(1)  Cor  Jesu,  divini  Redemptoris  Nostri  caritatis  symbolum.  Inns- 
bruck, 1872.  He  here  expresses  his  opinion  on  the  present  question 
more  clearly  than  in  his  large  work. 

(2)  P.  40. 

(3)  See  n.  175.  He  similarly  expresses  himself  in  his  Litany  of  the 
Sacred  Heart. 

(4)  See  pp.  11,  12,  21,  22. 

(5)  See  chapters  II  and  III  especially. 

(6)  Lc  Sacre  Coeur  de  Jesus,  Paris,  1886. 

(7)  De  Verbo  incarnato,  th.  36,  p.  332. 


40 


Authors'  Opinions. 


19.  In  developing  their  theses  on  the  worship  of  the  Sacred 
Heart,  (1)  Fathers  A.  Martorell  and  Joseph  Castella,  S.J., 
admit  that  this  worship  includes  both  uncreated  and  created 
love,  although  the  latter  is  more  strictly  its  object. 

20.  Father  J.  B.  Terrien,  S.J.,  is  credited  with  a very.clear 

exposition  of  the  question  and  gives,  categorically,  the  widest 
range  to  the  object.  “ The  answer,”  he  says,  “ cannot  be 
doubtful.  . . . Who  would  permit  us,  when  meditating 

on  the  love  of  Christ,  to  parcel  out  that  love,  as  it  were,  and 
to  separate  what  has  been  joined  in  such  divine  harmony? 
How  could  I behold  in  my  Saviour  at  the  tomb  of  His  friend 
Lazarus,  the  love  of  a God  Who  is  absolute  Master  of  death 
and  the  love  at  once  spiritual  and  sensible,  of  a man  who  con- 
soles Martha  and  Mary,  and  is  moved  even  to  tears,  and  then 
deliberately  make  a choice  among  these  manifestations  of  love, 
accepting  some  and  rejecting  others,  instead  of  adoring  and 
loving  the  Lord  Jesus  in  the  unity  of  His  multiple  love?” 
What  God  hath  joined  together  let  no  man  put  asunder,”  He 
tells  us  in  His  Gospel.  Elsewhere  Father  -Terrien  says  that 
we  should  not  totally  exclude  from  this  worship  the  love  of 
Our  Lord  for  His  Father. (2) 

Notwithstanding  our  respect  for  the  knowledge  and  piety 
of  a writer  so  worthy  in  the  sight  of  the  Sacred  Heart  and 
the  Blessed  Virgin, (3)  we  cannot  but  feel  that  the  energy  of 
his  statement  far  outweighs  the  value  of  the  proofs  furnished. 
There  is  no  question  of  parceling  out  love,  but  of  better  safe- 
guarding a distinction  which  Our  Lord  inculcates  even  in  the 
very  place  to  which  Father  Terrien  refers.  To  whom  does 
Jesus  attribute  the  operation  and  consequently  the  love  of  the 
Divinity?  Is  it  not  to  the  Father  Whom  He  thanks  for  having 
heard  His  prayer? (4)  There  is  no  question  of  disturbing 
the  harmony  between  the  two  loves,  but  rather  of  preserving 


(1)  Theses  de  cultu  SS.  Cordis  Jesn. 

(2)  La  Devotion  an  Sacre  Cceur  de  Jesus,  pp.  80,  81,  86,  87. 

(3)  Cf.  the  well  known  work;  La  Mere  de  Dieu  et  la  Mere  des 
hommes. 

(4)  Gospel  according  to  St.  John  XI,  14. 


Authors'  Opinions. 


41 


their  order  of  subordination  by  ascending  gradually  from  the 
created  to  the  uncreated  love.  And  here  the  suggestion  is  in 
place : “ Those  things  which  God  hath  distinguished  let  no 

man  confound.”  (1) 

21.  Answering  our  question,  the  Abbe  Baruteil,  in  his  re- 
cent volume  Genese  da  culte  da  Sacre  Coeur  de  Jesus,  ( 2)  ex- 
presses himself  thus:  “ By  the  love  of  Jesus,  which  is  honored 
as  the  object  of  this  devotion,  we  must  understand  the  love 
of  the  Son  of  God  for  His  Father  and  for  mankind,  before 
as  well  as  after  His  Incarnation,  but  in  a certain  order  which 
should  be  accurately  defined.” (3)  And  farther  on  he  ac- 
knowledges that  “ the  principal  object  of  the  worship  of  the 
Sacred  Heart  is  Its  love  for  us  both  as  God  and  as  man.” 

22.  Still  more  recently,  the  Messenger  of  the  Sacred  Heart 
reproduced (4)  articles  published  by  Father  Thill  in  the  Theo- 
logische  Quartalschrift  of  Linz , under  the  title  of  The  Heart 
in  the  Devotion  to  the  Sacred  Heart.  After  a very  scholarly 
exposition  of  the  meanings  of  the  word  Heart,  and  explanations 
concentrating  all  attention  upon  the  humanity  of  Jesus  Christ, 
the  learned  writer  formulates  this  assertion : “ This  love  of 
the  Man-God  is  at  the  same  time  human  and  divine,  and,  as 


(1)  The  author  is  mistaken  in  regard  to  both  the  value  and  the  mean- 
ing of  the  Acts  of  the  Holy  See,  of  which,  p.  81,  he  invokes  the 
authority  as  incontestable.  Indeed  he  can  only  quote  one  stanza  of 
the  hymn  of  Lauds  and  the  decree  of  1765.  In  spite  of  the  fact  that 
the  authority  of  a poetic  expression  can  never  rank  above  the  clear 
the  exact  formula  of  the  6th  Lesson  of  the  same  Office,  and  that 
the  decree  of  1765  has  been  withdrawn  from  the  collection  of  authentic 
decrees,  both  one  and  the  other  document  attributes  to  divine  love 
the  Incarnation  only.  Why,  we  shall  state  in  our  conclusions  later  on. 
It  is  true  that,  on  p.  82,  may  be  found  the  answer  of  the  Congregation 
of  Rites,  but  this  answer  is  in  reality  only  one  of  the  preambles  that 
the  Secretary  of  the  Congregation  claims  to  have  been  looked  into  by 
the  Sacred  Congregation  before  solving  the  doubts  inserted  in  a re- 
script of  April  3,  1821,  and  silently  passed  over  in  the  authentic  Decrees. 
In  the  non-authentic  edition,  this  decree  bore  the  number  4579  and  the 
Secretary’s  account  was  in  a note.  However,  this  account  also  referred 
to  the  decree  of  1765  and  attributed  to  the  Heart  of  Jesus  only  the 
Incarnation,  the  institution  of  the  Blessed  Sacrament  and  the  sacrifice 
of  the  Cross.  (See  later  on  our  remarks  on  the  decree  of  1765.) 

(2)  Paris,  1904. 

(3)  P.  152.— 3,  P.  154. 

(4)  June,  1905,  etc. 


42 


Decrees  of  the  Holy  See. 


such,  is  eternal,  sovereignly  wise,  all-powerful  and  infinitely 

merciful.”  (1) 

We  think  it  useless  further  to  multiply  quotations.  There 
is  ample  testimony  in  favor  of  the  cause  we  wish  to  defend, 
and  what  we  said  at  the  beginning  of  the  paragraph  is  hence- 
forth established : the  variety  of  opinions  leaves  room  for 
serious  discussion,  and  the  vagueness  of  statements  makes  us 
wish  for  greater  precision.  We  shall  now  consult  the  Acts 
of  the  Holy  See. 


3.  Decrees  of  the  Holy  See. 

1.  In  the  first  place  we  shall  quote  from  the  Memorial  pre- 
sented by  the  bishops  of  Poland  and  the  Roman  Archconfra- 
ternity to  the  Congregation  of  Rites.  Although  not  emanating 
from  the  Holy  See,  this  document  nevertheless  clearly  ex- 
presses its  views;  in  fact,  the  decree  of  January  26,  1765, 
rendered  by  the  Congregation  of  Rites,  simply  declares  its 
assent  to  the  petition  of  the  bishops  and  the  Archconfraternity, 
without  making  therein  a single  correction.  Since  that  time 
“ it  is  manifest  that  the  different  questions  on  the  nature , ob- 
ject and  end  of  the  worship  of  the  Heart  of  Jesus,  such  as  it 
is  approved  by  the  Church,  could  not  be  discussed  without 
considering  the  doctrine  of  the  Memorial”  ( 2) 

Now,  this  Memorial  is  constantly  referring  to  Father  de 
Gallifet,  and,  like  him,  the  signers  declare  that  Christ  is  the 
primary  object  of  the  devotion,  that  its  secondary  object  is 
the  Heart,  and  that  this  Heart  must  be  considered  as  inflamed 
with  love  for  men  and  deeply  injured  by  their  ingratitude. 
It  is  inflamed  with  love  because  the  love  with  which  Christ 
Jesus  loved  His  Father  and  mankind  was  conceived  in  a human 

(1)  P.  355.  It  were  useless  to  state  that  this  expression  cannot  be 
taken  literally.  It  would  be  evidently  contrary  to  the  author’s  idea 
to  acknowledge  in  Christ  a love  really  human,  at  the  same  time  as 
divine.  The  two  loves  belonging  to  the  same  Christ  cannot  be 
blended  into  one.  Their  unity  can  be  but  objective;  it  results  from 
a perfect  agreement  which  shows  us  above  the  created  will,  an  uncreated 
will  tending  toward  the  same  end. 

(2)  Nilles,  'De  Rationibus  ...  5,  vol.  I,  chap.  Ill,  p.  153. 


Decrees  of  the  Holy  See. 


43 


way : hence  there  was  in  the  heart  a sensible  love  correspond- 
ing to  the  spiritual  love  residing  in  the  soul.(l) 

The  last  Memorial,  presented  under  Benedict  XIII  and  pub- 
lished by  Father  Nilles,  is  couched  in  the  same  language. 
Wherefore  a special  devotion  to  the  Sacred  Heart?  Because 
of  the  affections  of  that  Heart;  because,  to  the  exclusion  of 
all  other  parts,  that  part  of  the  humanity  experienced  the 
strongest  impressions  of  love,  sorrow,  contrition  and  com- 
passion; “the  immense  love  of  Our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  is  not 
only  therein  contained  and  represented,  but,  as  it  were,  in- 
scribed and  sculptured.” (2)  All  this  is  Christ’s  love  in  His 
humanity. 

2.  In  the  Office  approved  for  the  entire  Church,  Clement 
XIII  and  the  Congregation  of  Rites  indicate  as  the  object  of 
the  feast  the  love  which  led  Christ  to  die  for  us  and  to  insti- 
tute in  our  behalf  the  Holy  Sacrament  of  the  Altar. 

3.  Pius  VI  similarly  expresses  himself  in  a letter  to  the 

Bishop  of  Pistoja  on  June  29.  “ The  substance  of  the  devo- 

tion to  the  Sacred  Heart  consists  in  meditating  upon  and 
venerating,  in  the  Heart  as  a symbolic  image,  the  immense 
charity,  the  loving  prodigality  of  Our  Divine  Redeemer.” (3) 
These  words,  taken  in  their  proper  sense,  point  out  to  us  as 
the  formal  and  special  object  of  worship,  the  love  which  Our 
Lord  bears  us  as  Redeemer.  What  St.  Augustine  said  of 
mediation (4)  holds  good  for  the  Redemption:  Christ  is  Re- 
deemer in  His  human  nature,  not  in  His  divine  nature.  His 
human  nature,  then,  is  the  seat  of  this  love. 

4.  Two  concessions  of  the  feast  given  by  Pius  VII  indicate 
the  same  object  as  does  the  invitatory  in  the  Office:  “Let 
us  adore  Christ  Who  has  suffered  for  us.”  “ We  have  heark- 
ened,” said  the  Pope,  “ to  the  wishes  of  the  faithful  who  de- 
sired to  see  the  worship  of  the  Heart  of  Jesus  amplified,  to 

(1)  See,  for  instance,  Nos.  27,  34,  37,  38  in  Nilles’  De  Rationibus 

. . . 5,  pp.  113,  120. 

(2)  Nilles,  De  Rationibus  ...  5,  pp.  74-76. 

(3)  Nilles,  De  Rationibus  . . . . o.  334,  note,  or  p.  344. 

(4)  “Non  quia  Deus,  sed  quia  homo.”  Enarrationes  in  Ps.  103,  n.  8. 
(Migne,  P.  L.,  vol.  XXXVI,  col.  1383.) 


44 


Decrees  of  the  Holy  See. 


celebrate  with  greater  fervor  the  excessive  charity  of  Our 
Lord  Jesus  Christ  suffering  and  dying  for  the  redemption  of 
mankind.”  (1) 

5.  In  the  decree  of  August  23,  1853,  in  which  he  gave  to 
the  entire  Church  the  feast  of  the  Sacred  Heart,  and  also  in 
the  brief  of  the  beatification  of  Blessed  Margaret  Mary, 
Pius  IX  considers  the  worship  of  the  Sacred  Heart  that  of 
the  immense  charity  of  the  Heart  of  Jesus  . . . the  means 
of  enkindling  in  men  the  flame  of  love  with  which  the  Heart 
of  Jesus  burns ; it  is  the  worship  of  the  Heart  burning  with 
love  for  mankind ; it  is  the  worship  of  the  Heart,  seat  of 
divine  charity.” (2)  The  love  of  which  the  Heart  is  the  seat, 
with  which  It  is  inflamed  and  which  It  desires  to  communi- 
cate, is  the  love  conceived  in  the  human  nature. 

6.  Most  of  the  Fathers  of  the  Vatican  Council , in  their 
petition  for  the  elevation  of  the  rite  of  the  feast,  defined  the 
object  of  the  devotion  as  the  love  of  Christ  under  the  symbol 
of  His  Heart.  They  recall  that  the  Pope  created  “ a new 
legion  of  apostles,  those  men  who  unite  their  prayers  to  the 
prayers  of  the  Heart  of  Jesus,  always  living  to  make  inter- 
cession in  our  behalf.  (3) 

7.  We  have  purposely  reserved,  as  worthy  of  the  closest 
examination,  the  decree  of  the  Sacred  Congregation  of  Rites, 
contemporary  with  the  approbation  of  the  Office,  by  which 
on  February  6,  1765,  the  Holy  See  proclaimed:  the  “Mass 
and  Office  tend  to  symbolically  renew  the  divine  love,  under 
the  impulse  of  which  the  only  Son  of  God  assumed  human 
nature  and,  becoming  obedient  even  unto  death,  declared  that 
He  thereby  gave  mankind  an  example  of  the  meekness  of  His 
Heart.” 

First  of  all,  let  us  observe  that  this  decree,  inserted  in  the 
preceding  editions,  was  taken  out  of  the  official  collection  of 
the  decisions  of  the  Sacred  Congregation  of  Rites,  and  that 
its  suppression  prevents  us  from  depending  too  much  upon  it. 

(1)  Nilles,  De  Rationibus  . . . 5,  p.  345. 

(2)  Ibid.,  pp.  346,  347. 

(3)  Nilles,  'Dc  Rationibus  . . . , p.  190. 


Decrees  of  the  Holy  See. 


45 


In  fact  the  committee  on  revision  adopted  as  a rule  the  re- 
jection of  useless  and  contradictory  decrees:  deeming  useless, 
those  repeated  to  satiety  and  contradictory,  such  as  conflicted 
with  other  decrees  or  certain  prescriptions  of  law  or  liturgy.  (1) 
Consequently,  were  the  discussion  of  this  decree  to  incon- 
venience us  in  any  way,  we  would  not  need  to  consider  it ; 
but  at  this  stage  of  our  work  it  behooves  us  to  explain  its 
meaning. 

Its  text,  strictly  understood,  leads  Marques  and  several 
others (2)  to  conclude  that  the  love  therein  mentioned  is  a 
divine  love  common  to  the  Trinity,  and  a human  love  peculiar 
to  Christ.  The  obedience  even  unto  death,  the  meekness  and 
humility  of  heart,  bespeak  a created  love,  and  as  the  love  that 
caused  the  Incarnation  necessarily  preceded  this  created  love, 
it  would  seem  identified  with  the  divine  nature.  We  are  not 
at  all  reluctant  to  subscribe  to  this  interpretation. 

Is  it,  however,  the  only  interpretation  of  which  the  text  is 
susceptible?  We  shall  see.  In  the  mystery  of  our  redemp- 
tion, God  wished  to  emphasize  the  tenderness  as  well  as  the 
power  of  His  providence.  Theology  teaches  us  that  He 
deigned  to  make  our  salvation  depend  upon  the  Incarnate 
Word’s  voluntary  acceptance  of  His  mission  and  death. 
Moreover,  from  the  very  beginning  of  His  earthly  existence, 
Christ  had  the  full  use  of  reason  and,  according  to  St.  Paul, (3) 
it  was  at  His  entrance  into  the  world  that . He  accepted  the 
immolation  of  His  entire  life  conformably  to  the  will  of  His 
Father.  “ Behold,  O Father,  I come  to  do  Thy  Will.”  Be- 
hold I come,  not  by  the  effect  of  my  human  will  but  accepting, 
in  that  will,  my  Incarnation,  just  as  in  the  Garden  of  Olives, 
that'  will  shall  accept  my  sufferings,  thus  directing  my  hu- 
manity toward  the  salvation  of  men.  To  this  concomitant  will 

(1)  Introduction,  p.  14.  The  Sacred  Congregation  is  at  present 
being  questioned  as  to  the  motives  of  this  rejection,  but  we  do  not 
know  whether  it  will  see  fit  to  explain. 

(2)  Especially  the  Secretary  of  the  Sacred  Congregation  of  Rites 
in  his  second  observation.  But  this  observation  is  already  charged 
with  error  on  another  ground.  See  Nilles’  De  Rationibus  . . . , pp. 
163,  164,  note. 

(3)  Hebr.y  X,  5-10. 


Decrees  of  the  Holy  See. 


46 

the  Incarnation  itself  may  be  ascribed.  By  an  anticipation 
all  the  more  natural  here  as  the  Person  of  Christ  is  eternal, 
we  refer  to  a moment  prior  to  the  Incarnation  a love  which 
is  really  concomitant  and  logically  subsequent.  We  are  surely 
familiar  with  the  much-used  allegory  that  represents  the  Word 
as  offering  Himself  to  His  Father  for  the  salvation  of  hu- 
manity ; and  is  not  the  truth  which  corresponds  to  this  picture 
entirely  in  the  human  will  of  the  Saviour?  Is  it  not  simply 
another  way  of  presenting  the  passage  in  the  Epistle  to  the 
Hebrews? 

The  following  considerations  militate  in  favor  of  this  ex- 
planation in  such  perfect  accord  with  the  passage  in  the  Epis- 
tle. The  text  of  the  decree,  if  we  will  re-read  it,  makes  the 
Incarnation  and  the  examples  of  meekness  and  humility  de- 
pend upon  an  impulse  of  love  ( amorem  quo).  Now  this  lan- 
guage is  not  only  indefinite,  but  even  inaccurate  if,  in  the  first 
place,  love  is  uncreated,  and  in  the  second,  created.  In  fact, 
the  love  of  the  divine  nature  is  different  from  the  love  of  the 
human  nature;  it  is  even  exterior  to  this  nature.  Indeed,  such 
language  used  by  the  Church  might  well  cause  surprise,  see- 
ing that  she  is  interested  in  distinguishing  between  the  two 
loves  as  carefully  as  she  distinguishes  between  the  natures 
and  wills.  Besides,  the  decree  would  interpose  a love  of  which 
there  is  no  trace  in  the  lessons  of  the  Office  approved  just  at 
that  time,  and  the  eternal,  infinite  love  would  necessarily  be- 
come the  principal  element.  The  learned  writer  Frangois 
Antoine  Zaccaria,  S.J.,  comments  on  the  common  decree,  and 
implies  that  in  this  passage  there  is  no  such  question  of  un- 
created but  only  of  created  love. 

This  second  interpretation  of  the  decision  of  1765  is,  there- 
fore, not  only  the  more  plausible,  but  even  more  probable. 
Does  it,  however,  correspond  with  the  opinion  of  the  Sacred 
Congregation  ? Let  us  compare  the  decree  with  the  Epistle  to 
the  Philippians  (II,  6-8)  : “Who  being  in  the  form  (nature) 
of  God,  thought  it  not  robbery,  to  be  himself  equal  to  God: 
but  debased  himself,  taking  the  form  (nature)  of  a servant, 


In  the  Light  of  Sacred  Scripture. 


47 


being  made  to  the  likeness  of  men  and  in  shape  found  as  a 
man.  He  humbled  himself,  becoming  obedient  unto  death, 
even  the  death  of  the  cross.”  Does  not  the  decree  recall  these 
last  two  phrases  when  it  alludes  to  the  divine  love  which  led 
the  only  Son  of  God  to  become  man  and  be  obedient  even  unto 
death?  And  does  it  not  again  revert  to  St.  Paul’s  views  when 
it  adds  the  Gospel  passage  of  St.  Matthew,  (1)  in  which  Our 
Lord  makes  Himself  an  example  of  meekness  and  humility  ?(2) 
In  fact,  in  the  5th  verse  of  the  same  chapter  of  the  letter  to 
the  Philippians,  the  Apostle  had  exhorted  the  Christians  to 
be  of  the  same  mind  as  Christ  Jesus.  Hence,  it  is  certainly 
the  Apostle  who  inspired  the  Sacred  Congregation,  and  from 
this  comparison  we  may  conclude  that,  without  directly  ex- 
plaining their  opinion,  the  authors  of  the  decree  of  1765 
wished  simply  to  invest  their  words  with  the  same  meaning 
which  those  of  St.  Paul  had. 

It  is  true  that  St.  Paul’s  words  are  open  to  controversial 
attack,  but  we  think  that  they  may  be  thus  explained. 

In  the  6th  verse  St.  Paul  enunciates  a permanent  fact, 
Christ’s  possession  of  the  divine  nature,  which  fact  is  an  in- 
violable claim  to  equality  with  God  in  honor  and  glory.  To 
this  dignity  and  this  prerogative  he  opposes  Christ’s  attitude 
on  two  occasions,  when  He  forgets  Himself  in  favor  of  us. 
(a)  He  divests  Himself,  so  to  speak,  of  the  divine  nature  in 
assuming  human  nature,  so  as  to  be  in  all  things  like  to  other 
men;  ( b ) in  this  nature  He  humbles  Himself  even  to  the 
death  of  the  cross.  In  this  second  instance  Christ  forgets 
Himself  in  His  human  nature.  Then  why  not,  in  the  sense 
heretofore  explained,  also  attribute  the  first  instance  of  self- 
forgetfulness  to  human  nature  since,  in  the  second  Epistle  to 
the  Corinthians  (VIII,  9),  we  are  reminded  that  being  rich, 
He  became  poor  for  our  sakes : that  through  His  poverty  we 
might  be  rich ; and  since  logic  and  the  parallelism  of  the 
passage  quoted  from  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  (X,  5-10)  in- 

(1)  Matt.,  XI,  29. 

(2)  The  literal  sense  of  the  text  is:  “Come  and  ascertain  by  experi- 
ence the  meekness  and  humility  of  My  Heart.” 


48  Theological  Examination  of  the  Question. 

vite  us  to  do  so.  If  such  be  the  meaning  of  the  verses  of  St. 
Paul,  such  is,  at  least  implicitly,  the  idea  of  the  authors  of  the 
decree  of  1765;  and  since  then  there  has  been  no  other  official 
document  immediately  proposing  the  love  of  the  divine  nature 
as  the  object  of  the  devotion  to  the  Sacred  Heart. 

4.  Theological  Examination  of  the  Question. 

In  accordance  with  our  programme  we  shall  go  to  the  very 
bottom  of  the  question  which  now  absorbs  us  and  which  may 
be  accurately  stated  in  this  way:  The  direct,  immediate  ob- 
ject of  the  devotion  to  the  Sacred  Heart,  is  the  living  Heart 
of  Jesus  Christ,  inasmuch  as  It  is  the  symbol  of  His  love. 
Is  this  love  created  love , uncreated  love,  or  both? 

However,  before  going  farther  it  would  seem  only  fitting 
here  to  record  the  results  of  our  little  investigation  and  to 
sum  up  the  impressions  made  by  reading  the  documents  of  the 
Holy  See,  the  revelations  made  to  Blessed  Margaret  Mary  and 
the  writings  of  approved  authors.  Thus  we  shall  be  directly 
applying  the  principles  set  forth  in  part  first  on  the  sources 
to  be  consulted.  Needless  to  say,  these  principles  will  not  be 
lost  to  viewT  in  our  reasoning. 

1.  The  documents  of  the  Holy  See  are  silent  on  the  subject 
of  Our  Lord’s  uncreated  love  and  His  love  for  His  Father,  if 
we  except  one  which  is  of  doubtful  authority  and  question- 
able meaning.  (1)  Besides  it  discusses  only  the  divine  love 
that  caused  the  Incarnation.  See  the  conclusive  proof  hereto- 
fore given. 

2.  In  the  great  revelations  made  to  Blessed  Margaret  Mary 
the  love  mentioned  always  seems  that  of  a real  heart ; the  mani- 
festations which  Our  Lord  there  recalls  and  shows,  so  to 
speak,  as  engraven  upon  His  Heart,  are  the  Passion  and  the 

(l)  Pere  Terrien  also  refers  to  the  hymn  of  Lauds  which  seems  so 
effectively  to  recall  the  Incarnation  ^nd  the  Passion.  We  do  not  need 
to  contradict,  the  more  especially  as  we  can  freely  accept  the  conclusion 
deduced  from  it.  (See  our  conclusions.)  But,  as  we  have  previously 
observed,  it  is  clear  that  stanzas  confined  within  a certain  meter  could 
never  be  set  up  against  the  exact  teaching  contained  in  the  lessons 
of  the  Office. 


Theological  Examination  of  the  Question.  49 

Eucharist,  and  the  love  is  at  once  intense  and  profoundly  sor- 
rowful. A human  heart  can  love  with  created  love  only.  “ It 
was  as  man  that  Christ  suffered  for  us ; and  as  such  He  re- 
news the  memory  of  His  Passion.”  (1)  The  Passion  and  the 
Eucharist  prove  to  us  the  love  which  Christ  manifests  for  us 
in  His  Human  Nature.  Only  this  love  could  really  have  been 
sorrowful.  Is  it  not  therefore  natural  to  conclude  that  created 
love  is  the  proper  object  of  the  devotion? 

3.  Authors  are  divided  in  their  opinions.  From  the  begin- 
ning some  among  them,  and  indeed  the  most  celebrated,  like 
Peres  Croiset  and  de  Gallifet,  seemed  to  consider  only  created 
love ; several  acknowledge  only  uncreated  love,  though  in  a 
broad  sense,  while  a few  put  both  loves  o..  in  equality. 

Let  us  then,  by  dint  of  reasoning,  endeavor  to  reach  clearer 
and  more  decisive  conclusions. 

To  proceed  as  clearly  as  possible,  we  shall  lead  up  to 
these  conclusions  by  developing  a series  of  special  points,  the 
first  of  which  will  not  only  enable  us  the  better  to  grasp  the 
truth,  but  will  render  it  easier  of  acceptance  by  obviating  cer- 
tain mistakes  which  would  detract  from  the  sublimity  of  a 
devotion  presented  to  us  in  so  very  rational  and  accessible 
a way. 

A.  In  What  Sense  Uncreated  Love  is  Necessarily  Under- 
stood in  the  Devotion  to  the  Sacred  Heart. 

1.  Infinite  and  in  Himself  worthy  of  all  love,  God  mani- 
fests to  us  His  amiability  and  His  perfections  in  effects  which 
excite  us  to  adore  and  love  Him.  When  these  effects — works 
or  creatures — are  foreign  to  all  personality  they  receive  no 
absolute  honor,  are  not  of  themselves  worthy  of  any  worship 
or  devotion,  but  they  impel  us  to  give  homage  to  God,  to  His 
infinite  perfections,  especially  to  His  goodness,  and  His  love. 
If  these  effects  constitute  a created  person,  or  something  per- 
taining to  a person  divine  or  created,  they  do  not  cease  to 
impel  us  to  love  God,  His  goodness,  His  love,  but  moreover, 
they  are  themselves  a direct  object  of  worship  and  of  love: 

(1)  Martorelli  and  Castelle,  Theses  No.  115, 


50 


Meaning  of  Uncreated  Love. 


of  a lesser  worship  and  love  if  the  person  be  inferior  to  God  ; 
of  an  identical  worship  when  the  perfection,  although  perhaps 
finite  in  essence,  is  nevertheless  interior  to  a divine  person. 
Hence  God,  the  Blessed  Trinity  and  uncreated  love,  could  not 
be  foreign  to  the  worship  of  the  Sacred  Heart : the  entire 
Humanity  of  Christ,  His  operations,  sufferings  and  also  His 
love,  cause  God  to  be  loved  and  uncreated  love  to  be  glorified. 
This  uncreated  love  is  the  final  object  of  the  devotion  to  the 
Sacred  Heart. 

2.  Moreover,  at  the  beginning  of  this  study,  we  found  that 
the  complete  object  of  a worship  is  always  the  person.  By 
devotion  to  the  Sacred  Heart  we  honor  Jesus  Christ,  adorable 
in  all  that  belongs  to  Him,  adorable  because  of  His  Divine 
Nature.  Again  in  this  sense  His  Divinity,  and  consequently 
His  uncreated  love,  receive  our  homage. 

In  honoring  the  Heart  of  Jesus  as  the  symbol  of  created 
love  only,  we  do  not  deny  the  uncreated  love  common  to  the 
Word  with  the  Father  and  the  Holy  Ghost;  we  do  not  with- 
draw it  from  the  complete  object  of  our  homage,  but  we  do 
not  recognize  it  as  the  special  object  which  directly  occasions 
this  homage ; we  adore  and  bless  it  in  a manifestation  apart 
from  it  and  less  sublime  in  essence,  but  closer  to  us  and  there- 
fore more  capable  of  impressing  us ; we  assign  a proper  ob- 
ject to  the  devotion,  an  object  analogous  to  those  which  have 
given  rise  to  other  devotions  tending  directly  to  the  Incarnate 
Word ; we  fix  our  attention  upon  an  affection,  a friendship, 
perfectly  comprehensible  to  us  because  in  human  form,  as  on 
a benefit  of  uncreated  love,  a benefit  of  the  same  order  as 
other  devotions  to  the  Saviour’s  Humanity  but,  by  reason  of 
its  universality,  superior  to  the  example,  the  liberality  and 
the  special  suffering  which  we  contemplate  in  them. 

B.  The  Value  and  Dignity  of  Christ’s  Created  Love. 

1.  In  itself  this  love  is  at  the  very  summit  of  the  created 
order.  No  affection  is  purer  in  its  intention,  more  constant 
in  its  duration,  richer  in  its  gifts,  more  ineffably  tender  in  its 
effusions ; and  it  is  the  act  of  a will  so  enriched  by  a plenitude 


Christ's  Created  Love. 


51 


of  graces  and  gifts  as  to  become  their  inexhaustible  source ; 
finally  this  love  partakes  of  the  substantial  holiness  of  the 
Word  to  which  it  is  united. 

2.  As  Christ’s  love,  it  is  of  a strictly  infinite  value.  Since 
this  truth  includes  the  mystery  of  the  hypostatic  union,  I 
shall  not  say  that  it  should  be  better  understood,  but  that  it 
should  certainly  be  more  seriously  meditated  upon.  While 
acknowledging  that  in  Christ  the  unity  of  person  combines 
with  the  duality  of  natures,  we  are  nevertheless  too  much  in- 
clined to  picture  to  ourselves  as  something  distinct  and  com- 
plete in  itself  not  only  the  Person  of  the  Word  and  the  Divine 
Nature  with  which  this  Person  is  identified,  but  also  the 
Human  Nature  in  which,  by  a prerogative  of  Its  infinity,  the 
Word  has  subsisted  since  the  Incarnation.  We  shall  form  a 
better  concept,  if  we  ever  bear  in  mind  that  from  the  time  of 
the  Incarnation  the  Human  Nature  is  not  something  exterior 
to  the  Person  of  the  Word  (1)  and  a sort  of  cloak  in  which 
it  is  enveloped:  far  from  reducing  itself  to  a mere  juxtaposi- 
tion, the  union  of  the  Word  and  the  Human  Nature  is  just 
as  intimate  as  the  union  between  a human  person  and  his 
nature.  Now,  in  the  state  of  union  the  person  and  the  nature 
constitute  a single  subsisting  being.  The  nature  receives  its 
completion  from  the  person,  independently  of  which  we  could 
not  conceive  it  as  existing.  How  impossible  to  address  the 
nature  without  addressing  the  person ! As  well  honor  a 
thought  without  the  thinking  mind.  The  better  to  insist  upon 
this  idea, (2)  though  it  be  far  from  our  purpose  here  to  give 
the  preference  to  any  one  philosophical  theory,  we  shall  refer 
to  the  Thomist  doctrine  which  provides  such  a just  conception 
of  the  intimacy  of  this  union.  It  decomposes  every  finite  being 
into  two  principles:  one,  the  essence  by  which  it  is  this  rather 
than  that;  the  other,  the  existence  by  which  this  is.  These 
two  principles  form  a single  concrete  reality.  Well  then,  the 


(1)  Franzelin,  De  Verbo  incarnato,  p.  466,  note. 

(2)  In  representing  the  person  as  giving  positive  completion  we  have 
already  insinuated  the  Thomist  explanation,  having  done  so  merely 
in  order  to  simplify  matters. 


52  Created  Love  of  the  Sacred  Heart  is  Basis  of  Devotion. 

Human  Nature  of  the  Word  is  not  completed  by  a created 
existence ; without  any  change  in  Itself  the  Person  of  the 
Word  supplies  this  act  for  the  Human  Nature  of  Christ:  It 
is  that  by  which  this  Nature  exists.  Under  this  aspect,  the 
adoration  and  the  dignity  of  the  Word  appear  as  having  fallen 
to  the  lot  of  the  Human  Nature,  and  the  latter  could  not  be 
the  object  of  special  homage  proportionate  only  to  its  finite 
essence ; the  Human  Nature  is  co-adored  with  the  Person  of 
the  Word,  as  a single  theandric  reality.  To  the  question:  Is 
there,  in  Christ,  a complete  reality,  purely  divine f we  must 
answer:  yes;  Is  there  a purely  human  reality?  No;  there  is  a 
divine  reality  and  a theandric  reality.  What  a marvel  of 
omnipotence  and  goodness ! In  the  Heart  of  the  Incarnate 
Word  God  gives  us  a divinihed , deified  love.(l) 

C.  Why  the  Special  Reason  for  the  Devotion  to  the  Sacr . d 
Heart  is  Furnished  by  Created,  not  Uncreated  Love. 

1.  First  motive. — The  special  reason  of  this  devotion  is 
found  in  the  living  Heart  of  the  Saviour,  considered  as  the  real 
symbol  of  His  love  for  us. (2)  But  as  the  living  Heart  of  the 
Saviour  is  the  real  symbol  of  His  created  love  it  could  not 
therefore  be  that  of  His  uncreated  love.  In  fact,  as  we  have 
already  shown  by  arguments  based  upon  reason  and  authority, 
the  Heart  is  the  real  symbol  of  the  love  which  It  renders  sensi- 
ble and  of  which  It  feels  the  slightest  repercussion.  Now. 
created  love,  both  sensible  and  spiritual,  and  created  love  only, 
finds  an  echo  within  the  Human  Heart  of  the  Saviour  and  is 
rendered  directly  sensible  by  that  Heart.  Hence,  the  Sacred 
Heart  is  the  real,  direct  symbol  of  created  love  only. 

Even  those  who  would  introduce  uncreated  love  must  agree 
to  this.  It  is  in  another  way  that  they  recognize  in  the  Heart 
of  Christ  the  symbol  of  this  love.  They  appeal,  for  instance, 
to  a sort  of  anthropomorphism  in  Holy  Scripture  which  ad- 
mits of  representing  by  a heart,  even  the  love  of  God.  But 


(1)  Muzzarelli,  op.  cit.,  p.  10. 

(2)  See  the  proofs  furnished  in  Section  IV  of  this  study. 


Devotion  to  the  Sacred  Heart  Rests  on  Created  Love.  53 

this  imaginary  symbolism  (1)  which  would  hold,  whether 
Our  Lord  became  incarnate  or  not,  has  nothing  in  common 
with  real  symbolism  which  makes  the  Heart  of  Jesus  and  His 
love  a single  object  of  worship.  (2)  The  Heart  of  the  Divinity 
exists  merely  on  canvas,  as  a simple  picture  worthy  of  relative 
honor  only. (3) 

If  they  resort  rather  to  the  perfect  union  of  the  two  wills, 
in  virtue  of  which  the  Human  Will  of  Christ  loves  nothing 
not  loved  by  His  Divine  Will,  they  merely  succeed  in  showing 
that  the  Heart  of  Jesus  does  not  directly  manifest  uncreated 
love,  but  only  by  means  of  created  affection ; therefore  the 
latter  only  constitutes  the  object  directly  symbolized. 

When,  in  her  account  of  the  revelation,  Blessed  Margaret 
Mary  represents  Christ  as  saying  : “ Behold  ” not  only  “ Him 
Who  loves  you,”  but,  “ Behold  the  Heart  which  has  loved  men 
so  much,”  what  idea  is  directly  evoked  other  than  that  of 
created  love?  Is  it  not  indeed  the  love  of  a human  heart? 

Correctly  speaking,  the  complete  object  of  the  devotion 
to  the  Sacred  Heart  is  therefore  the  God-Man,  loving  in  His 
Human  Nature  in  which  we  know  Him  to  be  infinitely  amia- 
ble for  “ in  the  mysteries  of  the  life  and  Passion  of  Christ, 
the  God-Man  is  acting  and  suffering  in  His  Humanity.” (4) 
And  this  very  analogy  confirms  the  conviction  we  are  en- 
deavoring to  establish. 

2.  Second  Motive. — First  let  us  recall  with  Father  Nilles, 
that  the  devotion  and  the  feast  of  the  Sacred  Heart  have  one 
and  the  same  object.  The  preamble  to  the  decree  of  conces- 
sion states  that  the  feast  was  asked  for  and  granted  in  order 
to  increase  a devotion  already  established. (5) 

According  to  Benedict  XIV,  “ no  feast  in  honor  of  Christ 

(1)  We  say  imaginary,  not  metaphorical:  the  heart  taken  as  a 
symbol  is  not  a metaphorical  heart.  Where  the  term  heart  is  sub- 
stituted for  love,  it  is  used  in  a metaphorical  sense,  but  is  not  taken 
as  a symbol. 

(2)  Heretofore  explained  in  Section  IV. 

(3)  See,  On  devotion  to  the  picture,  Franzelin,  De  Verbo  incarnato, 
vol.  II,  p.  458.. 

(4)  Franzelin,  op.  cit.,  p.  468. 

(5)  Nilles,  De  Rationibus  . . . , vol.  I,  p.  224. 


54  Devotion  to  the  Sacked  Heart  Rests  on  Created  Love. 

refers  to  the  Son  as  the  Second  Person  of  the  Blessed  Trinity; 
these  feasts  are  all  feasts  of  Christ,  that  is  to  say,  of  God  made 
Man,  representing  the  singular  graces  and  profound  mysteries 
which  the  Incarnate  Word  has  operated  for  the  salvation  of 
mankind.”  (1) 

Leo  XIII,  in  his  Encyclical  Divinum  illud  on  devotion  to  the 
Holy  Ghost,  formulates  these  two  general  propositions : there 
is  no  feast  in  honor  of  the  Word  according  to  its  Divine  Na- 
ture; the  honors  of  Christ  reflect  upon  the  Trinity.  . 

But  the  love  which  Jesus  Christ  bears  us  in  His  Divine 
Nature  is  a love  which  He  has  as  Second  Person  of  the 
Blessed  Trinity.  Therefore,  if  this  love  were  directly  honored, 
the  Word  as  Second  Person  of  the  Blessed  Trinity  would  be 
honored,  and  the  honor  would  not  need  to  reflect  upon  the 
Trinity;  it  would  be  given  to  the  Trinity  Itself. 

Perhaps  the  exception  may  be  raised,  that  this  worship 
would  not  be  directed  only  to  the  Second  Person  of  the  Holy 
Trinity,  but  that  it  would  be  mixed,  divided  between  the  two 
natures.  But  it  should  be  observed  that  the  proposition  of 
Benedict  XIV  is  exclusive:  to  deny  that  the  feasts  of  Christ 
are  in  honor  of  the  Word  as  Second  Person  of  the  Blessed 
Trinity  is  also  to  deny  that  such  feasts  could  even  partially 
refer  to  Him.  Besides,  a mixed  or  miscellaneous  devotion 
seems  to  us  to  present  serious  inconveniences.  Is  it  not  liable 
to  engender  confusion?  Authors  who  are  admirable  in  other 
respects,  speak  of  a love  of  Christ  at  once  divine  and  human ; 
of  a love  of  both  natures.  Now,  according  to  our  way  of 
thinking,  it  is  quite  as  deplorable  to  allude  to  one  love  in 
Christ  as  to  one  will,  notwithstanding  the  orthodox  explana- 
tion which  these  expressions  may  receive.  At  last  we  see  of 
what  dissimilar  elements  our  opponents  would  compose  the 
special  object  of  the  devotion.  To  introduce  both  uncreated 
and  created  love  into  the  devotion  to  the  Sacred  Heart,  the 
Heart  must  be  taken  first  in  the  proper  sense,  then  figura- 
tively ; or  at  least  two  different  symbolical  significations  must 


(l)  De  Beatif.  ct  Canonizatione,  liv.  p.  2,  XXX,  n.  2. 


Devotion  to  the  Sacred  Heart  Rests  on  Created  Love.  55 

be  attached  to  It.  The  worship  of  the  Humanity  of  Christ  be- 
comes the  worship  of  the  Divine  Nature  when,  from  created, 
we  pass  to  uncreated  love.  In  short,  the  latter  performs  the 
functions  of  the  direct  and  the  final  object.  This  all  seems 
too  complicated  for  the  truth,  and  piety  has  nothing  to  gain 
from  explanations  (1)  which  are  so  involved. 

Besides,  what  of  the  poor  and  lowly?  Can  we  forget  them 
when  speaking  of  the  Heart  of  Him  whose  chosen  ones  they 
are?  Surely  they  will  not  raise  the  question  as  to  the  nature 
of  the  love  presented  to  them,  whether  theandric  or  divine. 
In  fact  the  discussion  exceeds  their  comprehension  too  far 
to  interest  them.  But  will  not  the  solution  which  the  priest 
holds  as  true  influence  the  way  in  which  the  devotion  will  be 
proposed  from  the  pulpit,  or  in  the  popular  brochures  com- 
monly circulated?  Do  not  the  discourses  heard  and  the  writ- 
ings perused  sometimes  leave  the  impression  of  an  object  too 
indefinitely  circumscribed  or  too  complex?  But,  if  we  mistake 
not,  the  explanation  to  which  we  have  subscribed  frames  the 
devotion  to  the  Sacred  Heart  in  a well-defined  concept  easily 
grasped  by  all.  Indeed,  all  its  elements  may  be  included  in  a 
short  series  of  questions  and  answers. — Who  is  the  recipient 
of  our  homage  in  the  worship  of  the  Sacred  Heart?  Jesus 
Christ. — In  what  part  of  His  Sacred  Body  is  He  especially 
honored?  In  His  Heart. — Why?  Because  of  the  immense 
love,  repaid  by  ingratitude,  which  that  Heart  represents. — 
What  is  this  love?  A love  like  ours  in  form,  but  infinite  in 
value,  the  most  signal  proofs  of  which  were  the  sorrowful 
Passion  and  the  institution  of  the  Holy  Eucharist. — What  acts 
must  be  offered  it?  'Acts  of  love  and  atonement  and  frequent 
communions  of  reparation. 

Finally  let  us  add  in  favor  of  our  thesis,  that  it  emphasizes 
the  dignity  of  the  Humanity  of  the  Word  and  brings  into  re- 
lief the  role  played  by  that  Humanity : a role  that  serves  to 
bring  God  and  man  into  closer  relationship.  Those  who  in 
this  devotion  seem  to  place  created  and  uncreated  love  on  the 


(1)  Like  Muzzarelli’s. 


56  How  Uncreated  Love  Enters  Devotion  to  the  Sacred  Heart. 

same  footing  promote  the  interests  of  neither  one  nor  the  other. 
Created  love  risks  being  eclipsed  by  uncreated  love;  the  latter 
in  its  turn  is  masked  by  created  love  which,  in  their  ex- 
planations, these  devotees  must  constantly  recall,  even  to  the 
point  of  seeming  to  forget  the  love  which,  in  essence,  is 
infinite. 

At  the  time  of  writing  our  dissertation  it  was  our  good 
fortune  to  meet  in  the  Messager  du  Sacre-Coeur  (1868,  p.  275, 
etc.)  an  article  that  permits  us  to  identify  our  opinion  with 
that  of  Pere  H.  Ramiere.  Here  is  his  formal  testimony: 
“ Although  the  eternal  and  divine  love  with  which  Our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ  is  inflamed  is  in  no  way  foreign  to  the  devotion 
to  His  loving  Heart,  the  proper  object  of  this  devotion  is  His 
human  and  created  love  Then  follow  the  reasons  developed 
to  the  end  of  the  article. 

D.  How , in  a Broad  Sense,  Uncreated  Love  may  Become  the 
Special  Object  of  the  Devotion  to  the  Sacred  Heart. 

Some  great  authors  without  putting  the  two  loves  on  the 
same  level  grant  that,  in  a broad  sense , the  Heart  of  Jesus 
symbolizes  both  created  and  uncreated  love.  Such  is  the 
opinion  of  Marques,  Father  Nilles,  Father  de  San  and  Father 
Nix.  To  the  decree  of  1765  heretofore  explained,  which  con- 
stitutes their  principal  argument,  they  add  the  following  theo- 
logical reason:  The  perfect  agreement  of  the  two  wills  in 
Christ  makes  us  see  in  created  love  the  inspiration  of  un- 
created love ; therefore  the  Heart  that  symbolizes  the  first 
comes  to  symbolize  the  second. 

Let  us  set  this  conclusion  aside  for  a moment;  their  rea- 
soning fails  to  attain  its  end.  It  does  not  tally  with  the 
decree  of  the  Sacred  Congregation  which  they  endeavor  not 
to  contradict.  In  fact  this  decree  speaks  of  the  love  which 
led  the  Son  of  God  to  become  man.  If,  to  follow  them,  we 
must  understand  this  love  to  be  uncreated  love,  it  historically 
and  logically  preceded  the  formation  of  the  Heart  of  Jesus 
and  the  transports  of  created  love.  Hence  it  has  no  connec- 
tion whatever  with  a created  love  non-existent  at  the  time,  and 


How  Uncreated  Love  Enters  Devotion  to  the  Sacred  Heart.  57 

the  agreement  of  the  two  wills  in  Christ  does  not  explain  the 
symbol. 

Moreover,  this  reasoning  would  propose  as  the  material 
object  the  divine  love  guiding  and  inspiring  the  Saviour  in 
His  Human  Nature.  But  neither  the  Roman  Congregation 
nor  the  Gospel  speaks  thus.  The  divine  will  to  which  Christ 
conforms  His  human  will  is  referred  by  Him  to  His  Father. 
“ I do  always  the  things  that  please  him.  : . . Not  my  will, 
but  thine,  be  done.”(l)  The  divine  love  that  guides  the 
Saviour  is  attributed  to  the  Holy  Ghost.  It  was  under  the 
influence  of  the  Holy  Ghost  that  Jesus  went  into  the  desert; 
it  was  by  virtue  of  the  Holy  Ghost  that  He  expelled  demons 
and  the  Evangelist  recalls  the  prophetic  announcement,  “ The 
Spirit  of  the  Lord  is  upon  me.” (2) 

And  to  show  in  a word  the  deficiency  of  the  reasoning  itself, 
does  it  follow  that  because  the  created  love  of  Christ  manifests 
an  uncreated  love,  the  latter  is  any  other  than  the  final  object 
of  the  devotion,  such  as  we  have  explained  it? (3)  It  is  true 
that  the  flame  of  Jesus’  love  rises  heavenward  and  causes  us 
to  acknowledge  and  bless  an  eternal  and  infinite  love;  but  we 
must  not  confound  the  object  which  we  honor  with  the  ulti- 
mate end  toward  which  our  homage  should  be  directed. 

What,  however,  is  to  be  thought  of  that  symbolism  which, 
according  to  these  authors,  applies  by  extension  to  uncreated 
love,  because  of  the  perfect  agreement  of  the  divine  will  with 
the  human  will  of  Christ? 

Frankly,  we  do  not  favor  it.  Besides,  is  it  sufficient  that 
two  wills  be  united  upon  the  same  object  in  order  that  the 
symbol  of  the  one  be  that  of  the  other?  Were  the  wills  of  a 
like  nature  we  would  say  yes ; but  when  they  are  separated 
by  the  wide  differences  distinguishing  the  uncreated  from  the 
created,  the  eternal  and  immutable  from  that  which  is  tem- 
poral and  successive,  is  it  appropriate,  is  it  even  possible  to 
give  them  the  same  symbolical  representation  ? Assuredly 

(1)  Jn.  VIII,  29.  St.  Luke  XXII,  42;  and  elsewhere  in  St.  John. 

(2)  Matt.  IV,  1;  Luke  XI,  20;  IV,  18. 

(3)  See  first  point  in  this  subdivision : paragraph  A. 


58  How  Uncreated  Love  Enters  Devotion  to  the  Sacred  Heart. 

by  a sort  of  anthropomorphism,  of  which  we  have  already 
spoken,  the  heart  of  the  imaginary  body  with  which  we  invest 
God,  would  be  the  imaginary  symbol  of  divine  love.  But  in 
this  symbolism,  which  follows  a first  reduction  of  the  Divinity 
to  the  proportions  of  man,  no  one  is  mistaken  either  as  to  the 
meaning  or  the  deficient  character  of  the  representation.  On 
the  contrary,  to  our  mind,  the  Heart  of  Our  Lord  is  too  really 
the  symbol  of  the  theandric  affections  to  stand  at  the  same 
time  for  an  imaginary  symbol  of  the  purely  divine  affections, 
even  though  these  should  be  fixed  upon  the  same  objects. 

However,  we  refrain  from  openly  contradicting  the  authors 
who  admit  that,  in  a broad  sense,  the  Heart  of  Christ  can 
symbolize  uncreated  love.  Their  conclusion  can  be  accepted 
on  one  condition  only,  which  is  that  the  love  in  question  may 
be  called  the  love  of  Christ,  as  proper  to  Christ  or  attributed 
to  Him.  In  imposing  this  condition  we  are  following  the 
doctrine  so  forcibly  inculcated  by  Leo  XIII  in  his  Encyclical 
on  the  Holy  Ghost:  no  divine  person  is  given  special  honor 
except  that  provoked  by  an  exterior  mission  either  proper  to 
or  attributed  to  that  person. 

The  mission  which  the  Word  accomplishes  in  His  Humanity 
is  proper  to  Him , and  His  Heart  symbolizes  the  created  love 
with  which  It  has  real  affinities.  In  a wider  sense  the  Heart 
may  also  symbolize  an  uncrated  love  which,  in  consequence  of 
attribution , is  assimilated  to  the  first.  Is  there  one?  St. 
Thomas  replies  affirmatively.  Although  the  Incarnation  of 
the  Son  of  God  was  decided  upon  and  brought  about  by  the 
entire  Blessed  Trinity,  according  to  the  rules  of  appropria- 
tion set  forth  by  the  sainted  Doctor,  the  Father  is  supposed 
to  have  given  the  order  which  the  Son  is  reputed  to  have 
executed  in  assuming  human  nature ; that  is  to  say,  in  taking 
not  only  a soul  but  a body,  the  forming  of  which  is  attributed 
to  the  Holy  Ghost.  Hence  we  can  speak  of  a love  that  moved 
the  Father  to  give  or  to  send  His  Son  (1)  and  of  a love 
which  prompted  this  Son  to  take  upon  Himself  human  na- 


(1)  John,  ITT,  16. 


Conclusions  and  Corollaries. 


59 


ture.  (1)  It  is  this  uncreated  love  of  which  the  decree  of 
1765  speaks,  if  indeed,  uncreated  love  is  to  be  therein  under- 
stood. The  Heart  of  Christ  symbolizes  uncreated  love  for 
another  reason  than  that  which  makes  it  symbolize  created 
love.  It  is  the  symbol  of  the  latter  because  of  a real  corre- 
spondence with  the  affections  of  human  nature,  whereas  it  is 
the  symbol  of  the  uncreated  love  appropriated  to  Christ,  only 
by  virtue  of  an  imaginary  representation  which  gives  a human 
form  to  the  Divine  Person  Itself. 

E.  Conclusions  and  Corollaries. 

We  must  decidedly  exclude  from  the  Devotion  to  the 
Sacred  Heart  uncreated  love  as  manifested  in  the  creation  and 
in  the  Old  Testament.  These  amplifications  deprive  the  devo- 
tion of  its  special  character  and  proper  influence ; they  cause 
it  to  lose  itself  in  ambiguity. 

The  revelations  of  Blessed  Margaret  Mary  do  not  speak 
of  Our  Lord's  love  for  His  Father.  In  the  documents  of  the 
Holy  See  the  only  allusion  to  it  is  that  discreetly  made  by  the 
bishops  of  Poland.  Hence  we  shall  not  consider  this  love  the 
direct  object  of  the  Devotion  to  the  Sacred  Heart.  Jesus 
wishes  to  touch  us  by  the  love  He  bears  us ! But  in  respond- 
ing to  the  advances  of  Our  Sweet  Saviour,  in  accomplishing 
His  desires,  we  should  pledge  ourselves  to  imitate  His  virtues 
and  among  these  there  shines  forth  with  singular  brilliancy 
His  love  for  His  Father,  which  was  the  principle  virtue  of 
His  Heart.  Did  He  not  say : “ That  the  world  may  know 

that  I love  the  Father!  ”(2)  Why  then  should  not  the  friends 
of  His  Heart  take  heed  of  this? 

In  giving  us  the  devotion  to  His  Sacred  Heart  Our  Lord’s 
love  exhausted  itself  in  its  effort  thus  to  bless  the  Christians 
of  these  later  centuries.  (3)  Hence  we  shall  not  try  to  assign 
any  more  remote  date  to  this  cherished  form  of  worship  and 
by  so  doing  overlook  the  dominant  characteristics  of  the  de- 
ft) St.  Thomas,  Summa  Theologica,  part  III,  q.  XXXII,  a.  1,  ad  1. 

(2)  John,  XIV,  33. 

(3)  Vie  et  Oeuvres  dc  la  bienheureuse  Marguerite-Marie  Alacoque . 

t.  II,  p.  275. 


GO 


Conclusions  and  Corollaries. 


votion  as  we  practice  it  to-day,  only  to  confound  it  with  the 
enthusiastic  homage  formerly  paid  to  the  love  or  to  the  Heart 
of  Jesus  by  certain  saints.  To  be  sure  the  foundation  of  the 
devotion  was  revealed  with  Christianity,  and  we  may  say  that 
ever  since  the  Last  Supper  it  has  had  reason  to  exist.  From 
that  time  when  the  excessive  love  of  Our  Lord  led  Him  to 
give  Himself  up  to  death  for  us  and  to  institute  the  Blessed 
Eucharist,  has  not  that  love  been  subjected  to  the  grossest 
neglect  and  blackest  ingratitude?  But  it  remained  as  if  hidden 
in  the  Bosom  of  God  till  the  moment  when  Jesus,  through 
the  voice  of  a humble  religious,  proposed  “ to  Christians  an 
object  and  a means  so  well  qualified  to  engage  their  love.”(l) 

2.  When  speaking  or  writing  let  us  not  hesitate  to  bring 
Jesus  Christ  and  His  love  close  to  the  people  as,  by  so  doing, 
we  shall  be  entering  into  the  very  designs  of  Our  Lord  Him- 
self Who  wished  to  draw  us  to  His  Heart,  so  as  to  render  us 
more  sensible  to  the  delicacy  and  immensity  of  His  love.  Let 
us  then  put  clearly  before  the  eyes  of  the  faithful  a Heart 
that  really  beats  and  experiences  emotions  similar  to  those 
which  they  themselves  feel  in  their  best  moments ; a Heart 
that,  if  it  can  no  longer  suffer,  can  nevertheless  be  truly  com- 
forted by  them  and  take  delight  in  their  affections  ;(2j  a 
Heart  more  sensible  than  any  other  heart  to  the  influence  of 
all  the  sentiments  of  the  soul ; a Heart  that  loves  them  to 
excess  with  a love  of  the  same  form  as  that  which  they  may 
offer  in  return.  When  identified  with  the  Divine  Nature,  love 
is  too  far  beyond  all  conception  to  easily  move  us.  Human 
in  form,  divine  in  the  person  possessing  it,  it  is  worthy  of  all 
homage  and  most  capable  of  touching  us.  The  love  of  the 
Heart  of  Jesus,  like  Jesus  Christ  Himself,  is  the  excellent,  the 
indispensable  way,  human  and  yet  divine,  which  leads  us  up 
to  the  Father,  that  is  to  say,  to  the  Adorable  Trinity.  We 
honor  the  living  Heart  of  Jesus  to  find  therein  the  theandric 

(1)  Vie  et  Oeuvres  . . . , t.  II,  p.  275. 

(2)  In  writing  these  lines  we  recall  the  impression  which  this  simple 
remark  made  upon  a priest  exercising  the  sacred  ministry:  “We  can 
really  give  joy  to  Our  Lord!  What  a discovery!  What  advantages 
I hope  to  reap  from  it ! What  a resource  for  touching  hearts ! ” 


Conclusions  and  Corollaries. 


61 


love  which  it  symbolizes  and  by  means  of  which  we  may  be 
elevated  even  to  uncreated  love,  of  which  this  theandric  love 
itself  is  a supreme  gift. 

3.  A way  different  from  that  followed  by  Father  Billot, 
brings  us,  however,  to  the  formula  of  the  professor  in  the 
Roman  College : “ In  the  Incarnate  Word,  the  Heart  is  the 
symbol  of  uncreated  love  which  caused  the  Word  to  descend 
upon  earth  and  of  created  love  which  manifested  itself  from 
the  first  instant  and  led  Him  even  unto  the  cross.  . . '.  The 
contemplation  of  the  Sacred  Heart  recalls  to  us  all  the  prin- 
ciples of  our  salvation/’ (1) 

But  such  is  the  object  of  the  devotion  in  its  broadest  concep- 
tion. The  revelations  of  the  Blessed  One,  the  authority  of 
the  first  promoters  and  of  many  theologians,  the  lessons  of 
the  Breviary  and  theological  reasoning  confine  within  nar- 
rower limits  the  proper  and  precise  idea  of  the  devotion.  If, 
as  we  have  said  and  repeated,  its  complete  object  is  the  God- 
Man  loving  us  in  His  Human  Nature,  the  special  object  of 
the  devotion  is  the  Heart  of  Christ  with  the  created  love  which 
It  symbolizes : this  love  which  spent  itself  in  the  sacrifice  of 
the  cross  and  of  the  altar.  The  love  symbolized  demonstrates 
in  its  turn  an  uncreated  love  common  to  the  Father,  the  Son 
and  the  Holy  Ghost,  to  Whom  by  the  worship  of  the  Sacred 
Heart  we  finally  give  homage. 

Sublime  indeed  are  such  proofs  of  love  as  the  cross  and  the 
Eucharist,  but  still  more  sublime  is  the  love  which  inspires 
them.  And  when  this  love  is  conceived  in  the  human  way 
and,  on  the  other  hand,  divinihed  by  the  person  possessing  it, 
these  created  inspirations  of  a God  draw  us  irresistibly  to 
. God  and  to  His  infinite  love.  The  Heart  of  Christ  is  the 
supreme  pledge  of  the  eternal  love  of  God.  Such  is  the  devo- 
tion to  the  Sacred  Heart.  St.  Paul  gave  its  formula  when  he 
said : “ Dilexit  me  et  tradidit  semetipsum  pro  me.  He  loved 
me  and  delivered  Himself  for  me.” (2)  It  is  to  this  love  that 


(1)  De  Verbo  incarnato,  p.  332. 

(2)  Gal. , II,  20. 


62  Conclusions  and  Corollaries. 

the  devotion  to  the  Sacred  Heart  calls  our  attention  and  our 
gratitude. 

Gratitude!  Alas,  what  a sad  spectacle  of  ingratitude  do 
we  not  behold ! The  call  to  love  becomes  the  call  to  repara- 
tion. This  last  feature  completes  the  devotion  to  the  Sacred 
Heart,  and  Mgr.  d’Hulst  has  well  defined  it  as  the  perpetuity 
of  the  Holy  Hour.  (1) 

4.  The  custom  has  prevailed  of  addressing  ones  self  to  the 
Heart  of  Jesus  as  to  His  Person  Itself.  A legitimate  custom, 
said  the  bishops  of  Poland  in  their  Memorial, (2)  because  all 
that  terminates  in  the  heart  terminates  in  the  person. 

However,  it  is  important  thoroughly  to  understand  this 
mode  of  expression.  Invocations  addressed  to  the  Heart  of 
Jesus  should  be  understood  as  if  it  were  said : Jesus,  Who 
hast  a Heart,  and  this  Heart  should  be  taken  in  its  proper 
sense  as  the  real  Heart  which  at  the  same  time  is  the  symbol 
of  love. 

But  since  the  Heart,  properly  speaking,  symbolizes  only 
created  love,  all  the  qualities  attributed  to  the  Heart  should, 
in  so  far  as  possible,  be  understood  as  belonging  to  the 
Saviour’s  Human  Nature.  Thus  by  infinity  will  be  meant 
infiniteness  of  dignity; (3)  omnipotence,  the  power  that  is 
Christ’s  by  virtue  of  His  Passion  and  death : “ All  power  is 
given  to  me  in  heaven  and  on  earth.”  (4)  There  is  no  invoca- 
tion in  any  of  the  approved  litanies,  no  versicle  or  prayer  in 
the  Little  Office (5)  that  calls  for  another  interpretation. 

However,  the  person  invoked  combines  all  the  attributes 
of  the  Divinity  and  the  Humanity.  Invocations  such  as  this : 
Heart  of  Jesus,  save  me;  correspond  perfectly  to : Jesus,  by 
Thy  Sacred  Heart,  by  Its  tenderness,  save  me!  By  using 
similar  expressions  we  draw  from  Christ’s  Human  Nature, 

(1)  Lettres  de  direction,  2,  p.  74,  Lettre  L. 

(2)  Nilles,  De  Rationibus  . . . , 4,  p.  117,  n.  33. 

(3)  Muzzarelli,  op.  cit.,  p.  16.  The  same  author  does  not  so  well 
interpret  the  expression  “All-powerful  Heart.” 

(4)  Matthew,  XXVIII,  18. 

(5)  A stanza  in  Lauds  of  the  Divine  Office  recalls,  as  we  have  al- 
ready seen,  the  love  as  the  cause  of  the  Incarnation.  See  paragraph 
4,  note  1,  of  this  study. 


Devotion  to  the  Blessed  Sacrament. 


63 


from  His  Heart,  from  some  one  of  Its  qualities,  a reason  which 
entitles  us  to  the  intervention  of  the  Divine  Person  and  of 
its  divinity  itself.  It  follows  that,  if  the  Heart  or  the  qual- 
ity attributed  to  It  must  be  akin  to  the  Human  Nature,  always 
united  to  the  Divine  Person,  the  action  solicited  requires,  in 
fact,  always  will  require,  the  intervention  of  the  Divinity. 
Although  Our  Lord  intercedes  for  us  in  His  Humanity,  we 
do  not  beg  Him  in  the  vocative  to  pray  for  us.(l)  The  save 
us  of  the  invocation  heretofore  quoted  is  therefore  not  iden- 
tical with  the  similarly  worded  appeal  to  the  Blessed  Virgin 
nor  indeed  with  that  of  the  formula  Heart  of  Jesus,  salvation 
of  sinners;  but  it  is  the  save  us  addressed  to  the  Divinity. 

CHAPTER  VI. 

Devotion  to  the  Blessed  Sacrament  Compared  With  the 
Devotion  to  the  Sacred  Heart. 

Our  plan  calls  for  a brief  sketch  of  the  Devotion  to  the 
Blessed  Sacrament  which  directly  honors  the  Body  of  Jesus 
Christ,  as  is  testified  by  the  name  of  the  feast:  The  Solemnity 
of  the  Body  of  the  Lord.  In  the  Blessed  Eucharist  the  Body 
only  is  present  in  virtue  of  the  words  of  consecration ; the  Soul 
and  Divinity  are  there  by  concomitance  and  as  inseparable 
from  the  Saviour’s  glorious  Body. 

Thanks  to  this  Sacrament  Jesus  is  present  amongst  us;  He 
immolates  Himself  for  us  and  His  Body  becomes  the  spiritual 
nourishment  of  our  souls,  the  pledge  of  our  immortality.  This 
triple  blessing,  the  presence,  the  immolation  and  the  giving 
in  nourishment,  constitutes  the  special  reason  for  the  honor 
we  give  to  Christ. 

To  these  motives,  drawn  directly  from  the  consideration 
of  an  infinite  munificence,  may  be  added  those  suggested  by 
the  sight  of  our  ingratitude  toward  the  Author  of  these  super- 
eminent  benefits. 

(1)  However,  we  ask  Him  to  present  His  Wounds  to  His  Father; 
we  have  recourse  to  His  meditation  with  the  Divinity.  We  always 
pray  through  Christ. 


64 


Devotion  to  the  Blessed  Sacrament. 


If  we  compare  this  devotion  with  the  devotion  to  the  Sacred 
Heart,  we  find  that,  on  the  one  hand,  the  devotion  to  the 
Blessed  Sacrament  honors  the  entire  Body,  while  the  devo- 
tion to  the  Sacred  Heart  honors  but  a part.  On  the  other 
hand,  the  Real  Presence,  the  immolation  and  the  giving  in 
nourishment,  commemorated  in  the  worship  of  the  Blessed 
Sacrament,  constitute  together  one  of  the  two  great  benefits 
which  the  devotion  to  the  Sacred  Heart  refers  to  the  love  of 
Jesus  Christ.  Even  the  other  benefit,  the  Passion,  is  not  for- 
eign to  the  devotion  to  the  Blessed  Sacrament,  as  this  Sacra- 
ment is  the  memorial  of  the  Saviour’s  Passion ; the  very  time 
of  its  institution  recalls  the  Passion;  it  is  completed  during 
the  course  of  the  sacrifice,  which  is  a continuation  of  that 
on  Calvary ; it  was  symbolized  by  the  Precious  Blood  that 
flowed  from  Our  Lord’s  open  Side ; and  the  mystical  separa- 
tion on  our  altars,  of  the  Body  and  Blood  of  the  Saviour, 
represents  the  Passion  and  death  of  Christ. 

Hence  it  is  easy  to  understand  why  there  should  have  been 
such  conflicting  views  as  to  whether  the  object  of  both  devo- 
tions was  sufficiently  distinct  to  warrant  the  simultaneous 
commemoration  of  one  and  the  other  in  the  Office  and  the 
Mass.  The  negative  solution  of  the  question  prevailed.  Ac- 
cording to  the  opinion  of  the  Sacred  Congregation  of  Rites 
we  not  only  honor  the  same  Person  in  the  Blessed  Sacrament 
and  in  the  Sacred  Heart,  but  even  commemorate  the  same 
mystery.  It  is  for  this  reason  that  all  commemoration  of  the 
Blessed  Sacrament  is  excluded  from  the  Mass  of  the  Sacred 
Heart  and  vice  versa.  { 1) 

Should  it  be  asked  why,  on  the  eve  of  the  Feast  of  the 

Sacred  Heart,  the  Vespers  are  those  of  the  octave  of  the 

Blessed  Sacrament  rather  than  of  the  feast  of  the  morrow, 

the  two  following  reasons  reproduced  in  the  latest  edition  of 

the  decree  of  the  Sacred  Congregation  of  Rites (2)  may  be 

» 

given:  the  Feast  of  the  Blessed  Sacrament  is  primary  and 

(1)  Collectio  Decretomm  authenticorum,  n.  3924,  Decree  of  Julv 
3,  1896,  ad  IV. 

(2)  Vol.  IV,  pp.  248-249. 


Devotion  to  the  Holy  Ghost. 


65 


privileged,  whereas  the  Feast  of  the  Sacred  Heart  is  a second- 
ary feast  of  Our  Lord;  moreover,  “although  the  object  of 
both  feasts  be  the  same,(l)  one  feast  presents  us  with  the 
reality  of  which  the  other  offers  us  the  symbol.” 

Besides,  from  the  very  beginning,  the  Feast  of  the  Sacred 
Heart  has  been  looked  upon  as  a prolongation  of  the  Feast  of 
Corpus  Christi,  its  date  being  purposely  placed  after  the  octave 
of  this  solemnity  in  order  to  call  our  attention  to  the  insults 
suffered  by  Our  Lord  in  the  Sacrament  of  His  love.  The 
Feast  of  the  Sacred  Heart  is  invested  with  an  expiatory 
character  which  makes  it  in  a special  way  a public  reparation 
for  the  carelessness  and  indifference  manifested  during  the 
solemnity  of  Corpus  Christi. 

CHAPTER  VII. 

Devotion  to  the  Holy  Ghost  Compared  with  the  Devo- 
tion to  the  Sacred  Heart  of  Jesus. 

Another  sublime  devotion,  likewise  inspired  by  divine  love, 
is  that  to  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  we  shall  endeavor  to  give  in  a 
few  words  a clear  idea  of  it. 

The  mission  of  the  Word  to  mankind  occasioned  the  special 
devotion  to  Jesus  Christ,  and  the  mission  of  the  Holy  Ghost 
to  mankind  gave  rise  to  the  devotion  to  the  Holy  Ghost. 
There  is,  however,  this  notable  difference.  Jesus  Christ  is 
lovable  and  adorable  in  a humanity  which  is  truly  His.  hypo- 
statically  united  to  His  person ; the  Holy  Ghost  is  lovable  and 
adorable  in  benefits  exterior  to  His  Person,  common  to  all 
Three  Divine  Persons  and  simply  attributed  to  the  Third.  In 
the  devotion  to  the  Holy  Ghost  the  Third  Person  of  the 

(l)  Is  it  a mistake  to  see  the  ideas  stated  in  the  course  of  this 
work  confirmed  by  this  direction  which  contradicts  several  authors 
and  preceding  opinions?  In  thus  treating  the  question  of  commemora- 
tions the  Congregation  of  Rites  holds  to  the  object  of  the  Feast  as  it 
is  described  in  Lesson  VI  of  the  Office ; and  we  were  right  in  seeking 
there,  above  all,  the  actual  opinion  of  the  Holy  See.  It  is  on  condition 
of  seeing  in  the  devotion  to  the  Sacred  Heart  the  devotion  to  the 
love  of  Christ  suffering  and  instituting  the  Blessed  Eucharist  in  memory 
even  of  His  death,  that  one  may  consider,  as  it  were,  identical  in 
object  the  feast  of  the  real  Heart,  the  symbol  of  that  love,  and  the 
Feast  of  the  Sacrament  which  is  the  memorial  of  the  Passion. 


66 


Devotion  to  the  Holy  Ghost. 


Blessed  Trinity  is  directly  honored  just  as  the  Person  of  the 
Word  directly  receives  the  honor  called  forth  by  the  devotion 
to  the  Sacred  Heart:  in  both  cases  the  entire  Blessed  Trinity 
is  honored  indirectly.  But  in  the  devotion  to  the  Holy  Ghost 
the  honor  does  not  attain  a nature  or  a quality  proper  to  the 
Holy  Ghost,  as  in  the  devotion  to  the  Sacred  Heart  the 
homage  is  paid  to  the  Heart  and  the  love  proper  to  the  In- 
carnate Word  as  well  as  to  the  Person.  All  the  benefits  of 
divine  love,  that  is,  all  divine  benefits,  the  creation,  the  super- 
natural vocation,  the  sanctification,  even  the  Incarnation,  are 
the  reason  for  the  existence  of  this  devotion  to  the  Holy 
Ghost,  as  the  loving  action  and  Passion  of  the  Incarnate  Word 
are  the  motive  of  the  worship  of  the  Sacred  Heart;  but  we 
are  considering  above  all  that  mission  of  the  Holy  Ghost  which 
completes  and  crowns  the  mission  of  the  Incarnate  Word,  in 
granting  us  either  through  an  immediate  interior  operation 
or  the  channel  of  the  sacraments,  the  grace  and  the  glory 
merited  by  Jesus  Christ;  and  also  in  the  devotion  to  the 
Sacred  Heart,  although  we  commemorate  the  whole  Redemp- 
tion, the  Incarnate  Word  entire,  we  especially  honor  the  Pas- 
sion and  Eucharist. 

Not  only  is  the  Holy  Ghost  one  with  the  Father  and  the 
Son,  but  He  proceeds  from  the  Father  and  the  Son ; therefore 
we  can  readily  understand  how  the  worship  and  the  glory 
given  to  the  Holy  Ghost  are  at  the  same  time  given  to  the 
Father,  to  the  Son  and  to  the  Holy  Ghost.  If  it  is  in  accord- 
ance with  our  nature  to  attribute  divine  love  and  its  works 
to  one  Person,  this  in  no  wise  diverts  our  homage  from  the 
end  toward  which  it  should  tend,  which  is  the  entire  Divinity, 
the  principle  and  end  of  all  things. 


APPENDIX. 


1.  Devotion  to  the  Eucharistic  Heart  of  Jesus. 

The  expression  Eucharistic  Heart  of  Jesus  taken  alone,  may 
signify  Heart  of  Jesus  to  which  we  owe  the  Eucharist , just 
as  “ Agonizing  Heart  of  Jesus  ” means  the  Heart  I consider 
at  this  moment  in  Its  loving  Passion,  or  else  “ Heart  of  Jesus 
present  in  the  Blessed  Eucharist.” 

It  is  this  second  acceptation  that  is  adopted  in  the  recently 
approved  devotion  of  the  Eucharistic  Heart  of  Jesus.  To  be 
convinced  of  this  it  will  only  be  necessary  to  read  over  the  in- 
dulgenced  prayers,  particularly  this  invocation : “ Praised, 

adored,  loved  and  thanked  be  at  all  times  the  Eucharistic 
Heart  of  Jesus,  in  all  the  tabernacles  of  the  world,  unto  the 
end  of  time!”  (100  days’  indulgence  once  a day.)  It  is 
nevertheless  clear  that  in  considering  the  Eucharistic  Saviour 
our  attention  will  be  especially  drawn  to  the  benefit  of  His 
Presence  in  the  Blessed  Sacrament. 

This  expression  Eucharistic  Heart  is  evidently  adapted  to 
rhetorical  development,  which  will  be  more  or  less  correct 
and  successful  according  to  the  talent  and  learning  of  the 
author. 

But,  in  reality,  since  there  is  only  one  Heart  of  Jesus,  glori- 
ous in  Heaven,  glorious,  though  hidden,  in  the  tabernacle 
(since,  in  the  tabernacle,  the  Heart  has  neither  sentiment  nor 
action  proper  to  the  Eucharistic  state)  this  devotion  does  not 

67 


68 


Practice  of  the  Devotion. 


effectively  differ  from  the  devotion  to  the  Sacred  Heart.  (1) 
It  seeks  the  Heart  where  it  really  is,  in  the  Holy  Eucharist, 
by  directing  our  attention  in  a particular  manner  to  the  im- 
mense benefit  of  the  permanent  gift  of  Himself  thus  made  us 
by  Jesus  Christ. 

It  was  in  the  tabernacle  that  Blessed  Margaret  Mary  de- 
lighted to  adore  the  Divine  Heart,  and  indeed  many  writers 
think  that  the  worship  of  the  Eucharistic  Sacred  Heart  was 
the  same  that  she  sought  to  propagate.  (2) 

2.  The  Practice  of  the  Devotion  to  the  Sacred  Heart. 

According  to  Pere  de  Gallifet’s  beautiful  formula  the  de- 
votion should  respond  in  full  to  the  dignity,  love  and  addiction 
of  the  Heart  of  Jesus. 

The  principal  end  of  the  devotion  is  to  “ repair  by  love  and 
adoration  and  all  kinds  of  homage  the  many  insults  to  which 
the  excess  of  His  love  exposes  Jesus  Christ  at  all  times  in  this 
august  Sacrament." (3)  In  expressing  himself  on  the  sub- 
ject Pere  Croiset  simply  repeats  the  words  placed  by  Blessed 
Margaret  Mary  in  the  mouth  of  Our  Lord  Himself.  Pere  de 
Gallifet  uses  the  same  language(4)  and  the  Memorial  of- 
fered under  Benedict  XIV  to  the  Sacred  Congregation  of 
Rites  is  based  on  his  authority.  This  purpose  of  repara- 
tion is  also  inculcated  in  the  Office  of  Blessed  Margaret  Mary 
(Lesson  V)  : “ While  she  was  praying  before  the  Blessed 

Sacrament,  Our  Lord  showed  her  through  the  opening  in 
His  side,  His  Heart  surrounded  by  flames  and  encircled  with 
thorns ; and  He  bade  her  devote  herself  to  obtaining  that,  in 

(1)  “The  worship  of  the  Eucharistic  Heart  of  Jesus  is  not  more 
perfect  than  the  worship  of  the  Eucharist  Itself  and  does  not  differ 
from  the  worship  of  the  Sacred  Heart  of  Jesus.”  (Decree  of  the  Holy 
Office,  June  3,  1891.)  And  the  Raccolta  of  Indulgences  (edition  of 
1898),  before  giving  the  acts  of  homage  to  the  Eucharistic  Heart, 
remarks  that  “ the  devotion  to  the  Eucharistic  Heart  of  Jesus  should 
not  be  understood  as  differing  in  substance  from  that  which  the  Church 
already  professes  toward  this  same  Heart.” 

(2)  See  Blot’s  le  Coeur  Eucharistique,  t.  I,  n.  47. 

(3)  La  Devotion  au  Sacre  Coeur,  part  I,  chapt.  3,  to  the  end. 

(4)  De  cultu  . . . , liv.  Ill,  chapt.  3. 


Acts  of  the  Devotion. 


69 


return  for  such  love  and  in  reparation  for  the  insults  suffered 
from  the  ingratitude  of  men,  His  Heart  would  receive  public 
worship  of  which  magnificent  favors  would  be  the  reward.” 

Here,  as  always,  Our  Lord  was  eager  to  turn  even  our 
most  generous  acts  to  our  supreme  advantage.  Final  salva- 
tion and  abundance  of  all  spiritual  favors  are  promised  to 
those  who  honor  the  Heart  of  Jesus  and  endeavor  to  make  It 
known  and  loved.  Therefore  the  worship  has  a secondary 
end,  a spiritual  enrichment  by  which  we  ourselves  will  be  the 
first  to  profit  and  the  sweet  influence  of  which  will  be  felt  all 
around  us. 

3.  Acts  of  devotion.  Here  there  is  question  of  private  devo- 
tion only,  which  would  not  be  real  did  it  not  join  to  exterior 
acts  the  interior  acts  which  are  its  very  soul.  Several  authors 
have  carefully  traced  quite  a complete  programme  of  the  acts 
sanctioned  by  the  devotion  to  the  Sacred  Heart  of  Jesus. 
From  the  beginning  of  the  devotion  Pere  Jean  Croiset  dedi- 
cates the  greater  part  of  his  work  to  the  means  of  acquiring 
the  devotion  and  to  practical  exercises.  The  third  book  of 
Pere  de  Gallifet’s  celebrated  treatise  is  entitled : De  usu  et 
praxi  Cultus  S.  Cordis  Jesu}  and  still  later  Father  de  Franciosi, 
in  his  beautiful  book  La  Devotion  au  Sacre  Coeur  de  Jesus  et 
au  saint  Coeur  de  Marie,  also  insists  upon  the  practice  of  the 
devotion  and  the  means  of  acquiring  it;  and  Father  Bucce- 
roni’s  work,  C ommentarii  in  cultum  SS.  Cordis  Jesu,  contains  a 
close  analysis  of  the  homage  belonging  to  the  devotion  to  the 
Sacred  Heart. 

As  to  what  concerns  the  interior  acts  we  deem  it  well  to 
reproduce  two  of  Father  de  Gallifet’s  pages  (Book  III, 
Chap.  I). 

“ The  interior  worship  of  the  Heart  of  Jesus  consists,  for 
the  mind,  in  fathoming  the  excellence  of  the  Divine  Heart, 
that  is,  Its  dignity,  sanctity,  sublimity ; the  treasures  of  grace 


70 


Acts  of  the  Devotion. 


hidden  within  It ; all  that  It  has  endured  for  the  glory  of  God 
and  the  salvation  of  men ; how  pleasing  and  precious  It  is  to 
the  Most  Holy  Trinity;  the  attractions  It  possesses  for  all  the 
faithful ; briefly,  in  learning  how  much  this  Heart  deserves 
our  love  and  our  sovereign  respect.  These  considerations 
should  excite  within  u^  an  infinite  esteem  for  this  Holy  Heart. 
Such  is  the  first  foundation  of  the  entire  worship. 

The  first  care  of  lovers  of  the  Heart  of  Jesus  should  there- 
fore be  to  acquire  this  knowledge,  to  apply  their  mind  to  its 
contemplation  and  to  searching  its  depths.  For  this  purpose 
reading  alone  will  not  suffice ; there  must  be  meditation,  better 
still,  prayer,  and  even  the  practice  of  the  devotion. 

Having  thus  trained  the  mind  they  will  have  but  little 
trouble  in  controlling  the  acts  of  the  will,  we  mean  to  say  the 
affections  that  respond  to  the  infinite  excellence  of  the  Heart 
of  Jesus.  Supreme  adoration  is  due  to  Its  supreme  dignity. 
Its  sovereign  prerogatives  and  perfections  are  entitled  to 
admiration,  glorification  and  praise : Its  immense  love  merits 
a reciprocal  love ; the  benefits  of  which  It  is  for  us  the  source 
claim  a suitable  thanksgiving ; Its  mercy  invites  confidence ; 
the  virtues  of  which  It  is  the  seat  call  for  imitation ; the  in- 
sults which  wound  Its  honor  demand  reparation ; and  so  on 
with  the  rest. 

And  since  nothing  is  dearer  to  the  Heavenly  Father  than 
this  Divine  Heart,  we  avail  ourselves  of  Its  nearness  to  Him 
in  order  to  render  our  actions  and  sufferings  acceptable  and 
agreeable  to  the  Divine  Majesty,  by  uniting  them  all  to  the 
actions  and  sufferings  of  this  Most  Holy  Heart.  Through 
the  Heart  of  Jesus  we  adore  God,  we  praise  Him,  love  Him, 
implore  favors  of  Him,  give  Him  thanks,  resign  ourselves  to 
the  Divine  Will,  ask  pardon  of  our  faults  and  so  on.  Finally, 
and  this  practice,  as  it  were,  characterizes  the  devotion,  we 
compare  the  immense  love  with  which  the  Heart  of  Jesus 
burns  for  men  with  the  insults  which  they  in  their  ingratitude 


Acts  of  the  Devotion. 


73 


heap  upon  It  and,  knowing  ourselves  to  be  among  the  number 
of  ingrates,  covered  with  confusion  and  penetrated  with  sor- 
row, we  humbly  entreat  Its  pardon  and,  prostrate  before  It, 
offer  from  the  bottom  of  our  hearts  and  to  the  best  of  our 
power,  the  atonement  It  so  justly  claims.  This  kind  of 
homage,  as  the  nature  of  the  devotion  obviously  proves,  sub- 
stantiates the  most  ardent  desires  of  the  Heart  of  Jesus. 

The  help  of  the  memory  and  the  frequent  and  familiar  ap- 
peals of  this  Divine  Heart  enable  us  to  multiply  beyond  reck- 
oning the  acts  or  exercises  peculiar  to  the  interior  worship 
and,  while  contributing  to  its  entire  perfection,  necessarily 
lead  us  to  the  exterior  worship. 

We  shall  limit  ourselves  to  mentioning  the  principal  acts  of 
exterior  worship:  the  celebration  of  the  Feast  of  the  Sacred 
Heart  and  of  the  First  Friday,  especially  by  the  visit,  the 
amende  honorable,  the  consecration,  and  the  communion  of 
reparation  ;(1)  the  weekly  observance  of  Friday  by  meditation 
and  the  practice  of  the  Holy  Hour ; the  daily  devotion  of  obla- 
tion and  prayer;  the  exposing  of  the  picture  of  the  Sacred 
Heart;  frequent  and  fervent  communion : it  is  the  last  that 
brings  us  heart  to  heart  with  Our  Lord.  And  here  we  must 
not  forget  to  mention  imitation. (2)  so  dear  to  the  Heart  of 

(1)  We  know  the  great  promise  attached  to  the  communion  of 
the  nine  First  Fridays.  See  our  commentary  published  in  Ftudes, 
1903,  vol.  XCV,  p.  593,  or  our  brochure  : la  Grande  Promesse,  Paris. 
Retaux. 

(2)  The  imitation  of  the  virtues  of  Our  Lord  is  an  excellent  form 
with  which  to  clothe  reparative  love.  And  the  qualities  of  Our  Lord’s 
Heart,  especially  its  meekness  and  humility,  should  be  proposed  as 
examples.  Does  St.  Paul  not  emphatically  teach  this  in  the  passage 
already  quoted  from  his  Epistle  to  the  Philippians  (II,  5)  ? Thus 
conceived,  the  devotion  to  the  Sacred  Heart  contains  nothing  that  is  not 
legitimate  and  salutary ; and  it  is  presented  under  this  aspect  in  the 
Decree  of  1766  and  the  prayer  of  the  Office  approved  for  Venice.  How- 
ever, this  concept  is  not  that  bequeathed  to  us  in  the  revelations  of 
Blessed  Margaret  Mary.  Imitation  is  not  excluded  from  it,  but  neither 
is  it  indicated;  it  is  a concrete  way  of  loving  and  atoning. 


Dat- 


1 


BOSTON  COLLEGE 


3 9031 


342346  2 


72  The  Acts  of  Devotion. 

Jesus,  because  it  turns  to  practical  account  His  Passion,  death 
and  the  Eucharist  and  brings  us  ever  closer  to  Him ; and 
finally  the  Apostleship  which,  by  making  them  fruitful,  crowns 
both  virtue  and  love. 

All  these  acts  are  acts  or  evotion  to  the  Sacred  Heart, 
above  all  when  we  perform  them  out  of  love  and  reparation, 
the  two  g.  'f  duties  of  him  who  loves  the  Heart  of  Jesus. 
And  furthei  co  stimulate  our  ardor  let  us  consider  that  if  the 
sorrows  of  the  Heart  of  Jesus  necessarily  belong  to  the  past, 
the  Saviour  can  even  now  feel  in  His  Heart  the  sweet  joy 
which  a faithful,  generous  friendship  insures  to  men. 

Let  us  close  this  paragraph  by  quoting  a few  lines  from  the 
portrait  drawn  by  Pere  Croiset(l)  of  the  man  who  loves 
Jesus  Christ  perfectly.  “ The  man  who  loves  Jesus  Christ 
perfectly  is  a man  without  self-love,  without  dissimulation, 
without  ambition ; a man  strict  with  himself  at  all  times  and 
never  excusing  himself,  yet  extremely  lenient  with  others,  in 
whose  favor  he  excuses  everything.  Honest  but  not  affected, 
complacent  but  not  cowardly,  obliging  but  not  self-interested, 
extremely  exact  but  not  scrupulous,  constantly  united  to  God 
but  not  vehement,  never  idle  yet  not  seeming  over  assiduous, 
never  too  much  absorbed  in  nor  yet  distracted  by  his  occu- 
pations, he  always  keeps  his  heart  untrammelled,  occupying 
it  solely  with  the  great  affair  of  his  salvation.  He  has  but  a 
humble  opinion  of  himself  because  conscious  only  of  his  de- 
fects, whereas  he  esteems  others  on  account  of  seeing  naught 
but  their  virtues.” 

“ Increase,”  the  Apostle  St.  Peter  exhorts  us (2)  “ in  grace 
and  in  the  knowledge  of  Our  Lord  and  Saviour  Jesus  Christ. 
To  him  be  glory  both  now  and  in  the  day  of  eternity.  Amen.” 

A.  Vermeersch. 


(1)  La  Devotion  au  Sacre  Cceur,  part  III,  chap.  8,  paragraph  1. 

(2)  II  Peter,  III,  18. 


